Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81979 

15As noted in the proposing release, 75 FR at 

69059, on September 24, 2010, the Commission has 

also issued a Request for Comment on Options for 

a Proposed Exemptive Order Relating to the Trading 

and Clearing of Precious Metal Commodity-Based 

ETFs and a Concept Release, 75 FR 60411 

(September 30, 2010) (‘‘Precious Metal ETF 

Release’’). In the Precious Metal ETF Release, the 

Commission requested comment, in part, regarding 

whether it should issue a categorical Section 4(c) 

exemption to permit options and futures on shares 

of all or some precious metal commodity-based 

ETFs to be traded and cleared as options on 

securities and security futures, respectively. The 

comment period for the Precious Metal ETF Release 

expired on November 1, 2010; eight comments were 

received. 

The Commission will use its authority under 

Section 4(c) of the CEA to exempt options on 

indexes that measure the volatility of shares of gold 

ETFs at this time while it continues to consider the 

appropriateness of a categorical exemption with 

respect to options and futures on shares of precious 

metal commodity-based ETFs. The Commission 

concludes that options on an index that measures 

commodity price volatility based on shares of such 

an ETF do not raise the same regulatory concerns 

that may be associated with options and futures on 

shares of an ETF that is based on the underlying 

commodity. In this regard, trading in options and 

futures on shares of a gold ETF could have a 

potential impact on the deliverable supply by 

removing physical gold from physical marketing 

channels, and thus may impact the gold futures 

price. An index based on volatility measures does 

not raise these concerns in that such an index does 

not involve ownership of the commodity, either 

directly or indirectly, by traders in options on such 

an index, and thus options on such index would 

not have a direct impact on deliverable supplies or 

the pricing of gold in the cash market. 

16 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(10). 

17 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). 

18 7 U.S.C. 19(a). 

options on indexes that measure the 

volatility of shares of gold ETFs are 

subject to extensive and detailed 

regulation by the SEC under the ‘34 Act. 

Given such regulatory protections, the 

Commission has determined that all 

persons trading Options on the GVZ 

Index and other options on indexes that 

measure the volatility of shares of gold 

ETFs on a national securities exchange, 

and clearing such products through 

OCC in its capacity as a securities 

clearing agency, are appropriate 

persons. 

Third, the grant of this exemption 

would not have a material adverse effect 

on the ability of the Commission or any 

Commission-regulated market to carry 

out their regulatory responsibilities 

under the CEA.15

Therefore, upon due consideration, 

pursuant to its authority under § 4(c) of 

the CEA, the Commission hereby issues 

this Order and exempts the trading of 

the following products on national 

securities exchanges, and the clearing of 

all such products through the Options 

Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) in its 

capacity as a registered securities 

clearing agency, from the provisions of 

the CEA and the regulations thereunder, 

to the extent necessary to permit such 

products to be so traded and cleared: 

(a) Options on the GVZ Index; 

(b) Options on any index that 

measures the volatility (historical or 

expected) of the price(s) of shares of one 

or more gold ETFs; and 

(c) Options on any index that 

measures the volatility (historical or 

expected) of price(s) of shares of one or 

more gold ETFs and the price(s) of any 

other instrument(s), which other 

instruments are securities as defined in 

§ 3(a)(10) of the ’34 Act.16

This Order is subject to termination or 

revision, on a prospective basis, if the 

Commission determines upon further 

information that this exemption is not 

consistent with the public interest. If the 

Commission believes such exemption 

becomes detrimental to the public 

interest, the Commission may revoke 

this Order on its own motion. 

IV. Related Matters 

A. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(‘‘PRA’’) 17 imposes certain requirements 

on Federal agencies in connection with 

their conducting or sponsoring any 

collection of information as defined by 

the PRA. The proposed exemptive order 

would not, if approved, require a new 

collection of information from any 

entities that would be subject to the 

proposed order. 

B. Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Section 15(a) of the CEA 18 requires 

the Commission to consider the costs 

and benefits of its action before issuing 

an order under the CEA. By its terms, 

§ 15(a) does not require the Commission 

to quantify the costs and benefits of an 

order or to determine whether the 

benefits of the order outweigh its costs; 

rather, it requires that the Commission 

‘‘consider’’ the costs and benefits of its 

action. 

Section 15(a) of the CEA further 

specifies that the costs and benefits 

shall be evaluated in light of five broad 

areas of market and public concern: (1) 

Protection of market participants and 

the public; (2) efficiency, 

competitiveness, and financial integrity 

of futures markets; (3) price discovery; 

(4) sound risk management practices; 

and (5) other public interest 

considerations. The Commission may in 

its discretion give greater weight to any 

one of the five enumerated areas and 

could in its discretion determine that, 

notwithstanding its costs, a particular 

order is necessary or appropriate to 

protect the public interest or to 

effectuate any of the provisions or to 

accomplish any of the purposes of the 

CEA. 

The Commission has considered the 

costs and benefits of the order in light 

of the specific provisions of § 15(a) of 

the CEA. The Commission has 

determined that the costs of this order 

are not significant. Although the order 

exempts the subject options from 

regulation under the CEA, market 

participants and the public will 

nonetheless be protected because the 

national securities exchanges on which 

they trade, and the intermediaries 

through which they will be traded will 

be subject to comprehensive regulation 

by the SEC. The Commission has 

determined that the benefits of the order 

are substantial. The order will promote 

efficiency in the markets, as it will 

provide certainty that the subject 

options will not be subject to 

duplicative regulation. 

The Commission requested comment 

on its application of these factors in the 

proposing release. No such comments 

were received. 

After considering the costs and 

benefits, the Commission has 

determined to issue this order. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on December 

23, 2010 by the Commission. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32812 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

Proposed Notice of Funding 

Opportunity (NOFO) for Social 

Innovation Fund 2011 Awards; 

Request for Feedback 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service (the Corporation). 

ACTION: Request for Feedback on the 

Corporation’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 

Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) 

for Social Innovation Fund Awards. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (CNCS) is 

releasing a draft of the Notice of 

Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the 

2011 Social Innovation Fund 

competition. This release will initiate a 

public input period that will extend 

until January 21, 2011. 

The Social Innovation Fund is an 

innovative program that awards grants 

to and works with existing grantmaking 

institutions, referred to in the Notice as 

‘‘intermediaries,’’ to direct resources to 

innovative community-based nonprofit 

organizations that will identify and 

grow promising programs with 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81980 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

preliminary evidence of effectiveness. 

These programs will address challenges 

facing local communities in three 

priority issue areas: 

• Youth Development; 

• Economic Opportunity; and 

• Healthy Futures 

This public input process reinforces 

the commitment of CNCS to maintain 

the high standard of transparency and 

openness the Social Innovation Fund 

demonstrated in its initial year (2010). 

An open process is also critical to 

ensure that, moving forward, the Social 

Innovation Fund is able to select the 

high quality of grantees required to 

advance its mission—significantly and 

sustainably improving the lives of 

people in low-income communities 

throughout the U.S. 

CNCS has built on the lessons from 

the 2010 Social Innovation Fund 

competition, and is proposing several 

changes from last year’s process that are 

reflected in the draft 2011 document: 

• The Social Innovation Fund is 

taking additional steps towards 

transparency consistent with CNCS’s 

commitment to transparency. The 

NOFO indicates that CNCS plans to 

release the names and executive 

summaries of all applications 

considered for funding, the names of all 

expert reviewers, and the reviewer 

comments for all selected grantees. The 

public comment period will allow us to 

gauge the sector’s thoughts on this issue. 

• To expand the number of 

intermediaries able to participate in the 

Social Innovation Fund, we have 

decreased the maximum dollar amount 

for which intermediaries can apply from 

$10 million to $7 million. The 

minimum level will remain at $1 

million. 

• To stimulate the identification of 

additional high-impact communitybased organizations throughout the U.S., 

intermediaries will not be permitted to 

include pre-selected subgrantees in their 

applications. All intermediary 

applicants will select all of their 

subgrantees through open, competitive 

processes initiated after receipt of their 

award. 

• CNCS has streamlined and clarified 

the overall content of the NOFO to make 

it easier for organizations to apply. 

Particularly we have clarified the 

eligibility criteria, consolidated 

guidelines for narrative content, and 

added information about the review 

process. 

CNCS is soliciting public input on the 

proposed Social Innovation Fund 

NOFO. As appropriate, the feedback 

received will be taken into account in 

the final NOFA. (CNCS will not provide 

individual responses to feedback 

received.) 

DATES: Feedback Due Date: January 21, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit feedback 

by any of the following methods: 

(1) Electronically through the 

Corporation’s e-mail address system: 

SIFinput@cns.gov. 

(2) By mail sent to: Corporation for 

National and Community Service, 

Attention: Kirsten Breckinridge, Room 

10708A; 1201 New York Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20525. 

(3) By hand delivery or by courier to: 

The Corporation’s mailroom at Room 

8100 at the mail address given in 

paragraph (1) above, between 9 a.m. and 

4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

(4) By fax to: (202) 606–3466, 

Attention: Kirsten Breckinridge, SIF 

Docket Manager. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions regarding specific SIF 

program requirements should be 

directed to Kirsten Breckinridge by email at SIFinput@cns.gov. Persons with 

hearing or speech impairments may 

contact CNCS via TTY by calling the 

Federal Information Relay Service at 

(800) 877–8339. 

Overview Information 

A. Federal Agency Name: Corporation 

for National and Community Service. 

B. Funding Opportunity Title: Social 

Innovation Fund. 

C. Announcement Type: Initial 

announcement. 

D. Funding Opportunity Number: 

OMB Approval Numbers applicable to 

this NOFA are 3045–0129. 

E. Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 94.019. 

F. Dates: 

1. Application Receipt Requirements 

and Date: CNCS is not currently 

accepting applications for this 

assistance. 

2. Estimated Award Date. The 

estimated award date will be included 

in the final NOFA published by CNCS. 

G. Additional Important Overview 

Information: 

1. CNCS is specifically seeking 

feedback on the changes that have been 

made to the 2011 Social Innovation 

Fund Notice of Funding Opportunity 

that are intended to clarify the Social 

Innovation Fund transparency practices, 

as well as the review and selection 

processes from the 2010 NOFA. We also 

welcome feedback on changes to the 

Notice format. 

• CNCS is specifically inviting 

feedback on the outlined transparency 

practices and description of the review 

and selection process. CNCS is 

interested in whether the process and 

policies outlined reflect our intention to 

make public the processes behind grant 

selection and if not, how they can be 

changed to do so. 

• The Corporation has changed two 

policies within the 2010 Notice 

regarding the allowability of preselected subgrantees and the range of 

grant award that may be requested by an 

applicant. The Corporation is interested 

in public feedback on these two changes 

and the implications for potential 

applicant programming. 

• The format of the Notice of Funding 

Opportunity has been changed from the 

2010 NOFO to provide streamlined 

application narrative instructions and to 

more clearly delineate the eligibility 

criteria and the selection criteria. These 

changes are mostly contained within 

sections II, IV, and V. The Corporation 

is specifically inviting feedback on 

whether these changes improve the 

clarity of the eligibility and review 

criteria and whether the narrative 

instructions are clearly laid forth. 

2. Application materials. The NOFA 

and application materials will be 

available for download via the 

Corporation’s Web site at http:// 

www.nationalservice.gov/about/ 

programs/innovation.asp. 

Full Text of Announcement 

Overview 

This Notice of Funding Opportunity 

(Notice) announces the opportunity 

(pending the availability of 

appropriations) to apply for fiscal year 

2011 awards from the Social Innovation 

Fund. The Social Innovation Fund is 

administered by the Corporation for 

National and Community Service 

(CNCS), whose mission is to improve 

lives, strengthen communities, and 

foster civic participation through service 

and volunteering. As the nation’s largest 

grantmaker for service and volunteering, 

CNCS plays a critical role in building 

the capacity of America’s nonprofit 

sector and expanding the reach and 

impact of volunteers in addressing 

pressing community challenges. Last 

fiscal year, CNCS engaged an estimated 

5.5 million Americans in service, the 

largest total in its history. CNCS’s core 

programs are AmeriCorps, Learn and 

Serve America and Senior Corps. 

Created by the Edward M. Kennedy 

Serve America Act of 2009, the Social 

Innovation Fund is itself an innovative 

program that awards grants to and 

works with existing grantmaking 

institutions, referred to in this Notice as 

‘‘intermediaries,’’ to direct resources to 

innovative community-based nonprofit 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81981 

organizations to identify, validate, and 

grow promising approaches to 

challenges facing local communities in 

three priority issue areas: 

• Youth Development; 

• Economic Opportunity; and 

• Healthy Futures 

The true innovation behind the Social 

Innovation Fund stems from the 

combination of three major elements: (1) 

Its focus on developing, strengthening, 

and then replicating and expanding 

community solutions that deliver 

results, (2) its operating model, which 

represents a new way of doing business 

for the Federal government, and (3) its 

support of supplementary initiatives 

intended to leverage the grant program 

and benefit the broader social 

innovation field. 

With respect to validating and 

growing promising approaches, the 

Social Innovation Fund embraces a 

belief that many compelling solutions to 

the persistent problems of low-income 

communities have already been 

developed and successfully 

implemented, albeit on a limited scale, 

by social entrepreneurs and nonprofit 

organizations working in those very 

communities, who have a deep 

understanding of the problems and 

bring passion and fresh, practical 

thinking to the challenge of solving 

them. Accordingly, the Social 

Innovation Fund aims to identify those 

community-based organizations with 

the greatest potential for generating 

increased impact, help them strengthen 

their evidence base, and proactively 

support the growth of their work in 

order to significantly improve the lives 

of more people in more low-income 

communities. 

With respect to its operating model, 

the Social Innovation Fund’s approach 

to investing in promising community 

solutions is characterized by several 

elements that are explicitly designed to 

increase the effectiveness and 

sustainability of the program’s work 

while maximizing the impact generated 

per unit of public money invested. 

These elements include: (1) Reliance on 

intermediaries with strong skills and 

track records of success to do the critical 

work of selecting, validating, and 

growing high-impact nonprofit 

organizations; (2) requirements that 

each Federal dollar granted by the 

Social Innovation Fund be matched 1:1 

by the grantees and again by subgrantees 

with money from private and other nonFederal sources, (3) strict accountability 

for the achievement of impact and 

outcomes rather than for activities and 

outputs; and (4) requirements for 

systematic evaluation of program 

performance and results at all three 

critical levels: the service-providing 

nonprofit organizations, the 

intermediaries and the Social 

Innovation Fund itself. 

Last year, the Social Innovation Fund 

competitively selected 11 intermediaries 

with exemplary track records of success 

at identifying, supporting and growing 

promising approaches to critical 

community challenges. To learn more 

about last year’s grantees and to read 

their full applications to CNCS, please 

visit: http://www.nationalservice.gov/ 

about/programs/innovation.asp. 

CNCS embraces the Obama 

Administration’s emphasis on open 

government and is moving toward 

greater openness and transparency in 

grantmaking. Last year, the Social 

Innovation fund took an unprecedented 

step in this direction by making 

available the names of expert reviewers, 

the names of applicants who were 

considered for funding, and the full 

applications and review comments for 

the selected grantees. 

For the 2011 Social Innovation Fund 

competition, CNCS has described the 

application review process stage by 

stage (see section V of this Notice). The 

following information will be provided 

to the public (except for any information 

which is clearly protected by law) 

within 90 days of announcing the 

selected grantees: 

• Names of expert reviewers. 

• List of all applicants considered for 

funding. 

• Executive summaries of all 

applications considered for funding. 

• The applications of selected 

grantees. 

• External reviewer comments for the 

selected grantees. 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

A. What is the purpose of the Social 

Innovation Fund? 

The purpose of the Social Innovation 

Fund is to improve the lives of people 

in low-income communities throughout 

the United States by increasing the 

impact and scale of innovative 

community-based approaches that 

deliver results in three critical areas, 

youth development, economic 

opportunity and healthy futures. To this 

end, the Social Innovation Fund is a 

vehicle to: (1) Promote public and 

private investment in community-based 

nonprofit organizations with promising 

approaches to critical challenges to 

validate their impact and replicate and 

expand to serve more communities (2) 

through the use of appropriate evidence, 

identify additional effective approaches 

to addressing critical community 

challenges and broadly share this 

knowledge; and (3) develop the 

grantmaking infrastructure necessary to 

support the work of social innovation in 

communities across the country. 

As relates to the Social Innovation 

Fund, ‘‘social innovation’’ is understood 

to be the development and eventual 

scaling of promising and potentially 

transformative community-based 

approaches that solve critical problems. 

An approach is ‘‘transformative’’ if it not 

only produces strong impact (as defined 

in this Notice), but also (1) has the 

potential to affect how the same 

challenge is addressed in other 

communities, (2) addresses more than 

one critical community challenge 

concurrently, or (3) produces significant 

cost savings through gains in efficiency. 

Although the practice of social 

innovation requires the invention and 

testing of new ideas, the Social 

Innovation Fund is not intended to 

fulfill this role, for two reasons: First, 

the nonprofit marketplace offers sources 

of funding for that stage of development; 

and, second, the Social Innovation Fund 

believes that public funds are most 

appropriately and responsibly used for 

programs with a higher probability of 

success. Consequently, the Social 

Innovation Fund focuses primarily on 

‘‘promising’’ approaches. These 

approaches may be relatively new or 

have limited current market penetration, 

but they will have a body of operational 

experience and at least preliminary 

evidence of effectiveness, as defined in 

this Notice. 

B. How does the Social Innovation Fund 

program work? 

In FY 2011, CNCS will award a 

limited number of Social Innovation 

Fund grants to outstanding grantmaking 

institutions, referred to in this Notice as 

‘‘intermediaries.’’ These intermediaries 

will match every Federal dollar of the 

grant award in cash. They will then 

identify and invest at least 80% of their 

Federal funds (plus identified cash 

matching funds) in portfolios of 

promising community-based nonprofit 

organizations (subgrantees) working in 

low-income communities in one or 

more of the following issue areas: 

• Youth Development—Preparing 

America’s youth for success in school, 

active citizenship, productive work, and 

healthy and safe lives. 

• Economic Opportunity—Increasing 

economic opportunities for 

economically disadvantaged 

individuals. 

• Healthy Futures—Promoting 

healthy lifestyles and reducing the risk 

factors that can lead to illness. 

Subgrantees will also match every 

dollar of their awards in cash and will 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81982 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

utilize CNCS funding to produce 

measurable outcomes within a specific 

issue area and geographic area, evaluate 

their effectiveness and replicate and 

expand to serve more individuals. 

Throughout this process, subgrantees 

will be supported and monitored by the 

intermediaries, who will remain 

accountable to CNCS for the 

achievement of the intended results set 

forth in their proposals. 

Successful intermediary applicants in 

this funding competition will have: 

• A track record of using rigorous 

evidence to select, invest in, validate, 

support, and monitor the replication 

and expansion of their subgrantees; 

• The capacity to conduct a 

competitive process for selecting 

innovative nonprofit community 

organizations with effective and 

potentially transformative approaches; 

• Expertise in one or more of the 

issue areas; and 

• Deep and broad relationships with 

stakeholders in one or more priority 

issue areas and/or specific geographic 

regions. 

This Notice provides full details on 

how applicants must address these and 

other factors in submitting their 

applications. 

C. What is the match requirement for 

this competition? 

Social Innovation Fund grantees will 

match the Federal funds received, 

dollar-for-dollar, in cash. For FY 2011, 

Social Innovation Fund applicants must 

demonstrate the ability to meet 50 

percent of their cash match requirement 

at the time of the application. 

Subgrantees will be required to provide 

the same match (dollar-for-dollar, in 

cash) for every dollar received. 

D. How does CNCS define ‘‘low-income 

communities’’? 

As specified in section 198K of the 

National and Community Service Act of 

1990 (‘‘the Act’’), Social Innovation 

Fund intermediary grantees must make 

subgrants and otherwise support 

programs that serve ‘‘low-income’’ 

communities. For purposes of this 

Notice, ‘‘low-income community’’ means 

either: 

• A population of individuals or 

households being served by a 

subgrantee on the basis of having a 

household income that is 200 percent or 

less of the applicable Federal poverty 

guideline, or 

• Either a population of individuals 

or households, or a specific local 

geographic area, with specific 

measurable indicators that correlate to 

low-income status, such as, but not 

exclusive to, long-term unemployment, 

risk of homelessness, low school 

achievement, persistent hunger, or 

serious mental illness. An application 

that proposes to rely on measurable 

indicators should fully describe the 

basis for relying upon those indicators 

(including citations to appropriate 

studies). The application must also 

describe and cite the source of data 

supporting the conclusion that the 

targeted community meets the 

indicators. 

E. How does the CNCS define which 

communities are ‘‘significantly 

philanthropically underserved’’? 

In making its final award 

determinations under this Notice, 

section 198K(h)(2) of the Act requires 

CNCS to include, among award 

recipients, eligible applicants that 

propose to provide subgrants to 

nonprofit community organizations that 

will serve ‘‘significantly 

philanthropically underserved’’ 

communities. For purposes of this FY 

2011 Notice, CNCS will consider 

applicants serving significantly 

philanthropically underserved 

communities if they carryout activities 

in low-income communities (as defined 

above), which are also in a rural 

geographic area. 

For purposes of this Notice, a rural 

geographic area is one with a 2003 

Rural-Urban Continuum Code of 4 or 

higher (as issued by the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Economic 

Research Service). The full list of RuralUrban Continuum Codes is listed here: 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/ 

rurality/ruralurbcon/. 

F. What is the subgranting process and 

what are requirements? 

As discussed above, this Notice seeks 

applications for organizations to act as 

intermediaries. By statute, 

intermediaries must select subgrantees 

on a competitive basis. The primary 

functions of Social Innovation Fund 

awardees will be to conduct competitive 

subgrant competitions and administer 

those subgrants as required by the Act, 

this Notice, and the terms and 

conditions of the final awards. 

Competitive subgrant competitions 

must be completed within six months of 

the grant award. CNCS may review the 

results of subgrant processes for 

compliance and appropriate outcomes. 

Subgrants are to be made in annual 

amounts of $100,000 or more, per year, 

for a period between three and five 

years. For the FY 2011 Social 

Innovation Fund competition, CNCS 

anticipates Social Innovation Fund 

intermediaries awarding larger 

subgrants to programs that show the 

higher levels of impact and 

effectiveness, as defined below. 

Applicants should note that their 

subgrantees will be required to provide 

dollar-for-dollar matching funds, in 

cash, for each year that they receive a 

Social Innovation Fund subgrant. 

In order to maximize the impact of the 

Social Innovation Fund and ensure a 

diverse array of innovative grantees 

across the Federal government, 

intermediary applicants should direct 

Social Innovation Fund funds toward 

innovations that will not receive grants 

for the same activities from other 

Federal innovation funds (e.g., 

‘‘Investing in Innovation’’ at the Federal 

Department of Education). Final Social 

Innovation Fund award decisions may 

take into consideration the outcomes of 

other Federal competitions. 

G. What constitutes a ‘‘competitive 

subgrant competition’’? 

As described in this Notice, Social 

Innovation Fund intermediaries must 

select their subgrantees through an open 

and competitive process. Applicants 

should clearly describe their plan for 

subgranting in their application 

narrative and will want to include the 

characteristics described below. 

To ensure that the competition is 

open, Intermediaries should provide 

sufficient public notice of the 

availability of Social Innovation Fund 

subgrants to eligible nonprofit 

community organizations. 

Intermediaries will also want to ensure 

that the following information is 

available to all potential applicants: 

• What organizations are eligible for 

funding; 

• How to obtain and submit an 

application; 

• The criteria (including appropriate 

subcriteria) that will be considered in 

reviewing applications; and 

• Any relative percentages, weights, 

or other means used to distinguish 

among the criteria. 

In their application, intermediaries 

should also describe how their review 

process will ensure applications are 

reviewed in a manner consistent with 

the established criteria and how they 

will ensure the process is free from any 

actual conflicts of interest or the 

reasonable perception of any such 

conflict. 

H. What emphasis does the Social 

Innovation Fund place on evidence of 

effectiveness? 

CNCS is committed to using the 

resources available to encourage public 

and private investment in a portfolio of 

approaches with the potential to 

produce transformative results. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81983 

Wherever possible, this means acting on 

evidence from well-designed and wellimplemented experimental or quasiexperimental studies that demonstrate 

the program has a sizeable impact. 

However, CNCS recognizes that in many 

fields, and in many parts of the country, 

such evidence is not available. In those 

cases, CNCS is committed to funding 

promising efforts that will build on the 

existing base of evidence and grow our 

evidence about what works, improve 

programs, and inform future 

investments. All selected subgrantees 

will be required to have at least 

‘‘preliminary’’ evidence of their impact 

and effectiveness. 

The Social Innovation Fund will 

support the use of evidence in several 

ways. First, the Social Innovation Fund 

will prioritize intermediaries that have 

a track record of using evidence (see 

Section V) to select and invest in their 

subgrantees. Second, the Social 

Innovation Fund will require the use of 

data and evaluation tools by both 

intermediaries and subgrantees to 

validate their effectiveness and support 

the replication and expansion of their 

programs. Third, the Social Innovation 

Fund will evaluate the efforts of 

intermediaries and their subgrantees to 

achieve measurable outcomes. Fourth, 

the Social Innovation Fund will require 

that intermediaries put in place plans 

for all subgrantees to achieve at least 

moderate levels of evidence. 

I. What definitions of impact and 

evidence will the Social Innovation 

Fund use? 

As mentioned above, successful 

applicants should demonstrate a history 

of using evidence of effectiveness to 

select and invest in their subgrantees 

and should propose a clear and detailed 

plan for validating the effectiveness of 

promising programs and evaluating the 

impact of their investments in 

replicating and expanding programs. 

One of the goals of these evaluation 

plans should be to increase the number 

of programs over time that have 

moderate or strong evidence of program 

effectiveness. 

CNCS will use the following 

definitions of impact and evidence 

(these definitions are consistent with 

those used in the Investing in 

Innovation fund at the Federal 

Department of Education): 

• Strong impact means an impact 

with a substantial likelihood of yielding 

a major change in life outcomes for 

individuals or improvements in 

community standards of living. This 

definition will vary with context. To 

give examples, a mentoring program 

that cut youth crime by two percent 

over a given period would not have a 

strong impact, but a program that cut 

such crime by 20 percent could. A 

program that increases earnings by $50 

per week for one month, and then fades 

out, would not have a strong impact. A 

program that increased earnings by this 

amount for a period of years would. 

• Strong evidence means evidence 

from previous studies whose designs 

can support causal conclusions (i.e., 

studies with high internal validity), and 

studies that in total include enough of 

the range of participants and settings to 

support scaling up to the State, regional, 

or national level (i.e., studies with high 

external validity). The following are 

examples of strong evidence: (1) More 

than one well-designed and wellimplemented experimental study or 

well-designed and well-implemented 

quasi-experimental study that supports 

the effectiveness of the practice, 

strategy, or program; or (2) one large, 

well-designed and well-implemented 

randomized controlled, multisite trial 

that supports the effectiveness of the 

practice, strategy, or program. 

• Moderate evidence means evidence 

from previous studies whose designs 

can support causal conclusions (i.e., 

studies with high internal validity) but 

have limited generalizability (i.e., 

moderate external validity), or studies 

with high external validity but moderate 

internal validity. The following would 

constitute moderate evidence: (1) At 

least one well-designed and wellimplemented experimental or quasiexperimental study supporting the 

effectiveness of the practice strategy, or 

program, with small sample sizes or 

other conditions of implementation or 

analysis that limit generalizability; (2) at 

least one well-designed and wellimplemented experimental or quasiexperimental study that does not 

demonstrate equivalence between the 

intervention and comparison groups at 

program entry but that has no other 

major flaws related to internal validity; 

or (3) correlational research with strong 

statistical controls for selection bias and 

for discerning the influence of internal 

factors. 

• Preliminary evidence means 

evidence that is based on a reasonable 

hypothesis supported by research 

findings. Thus, research that has yielded 

promising results for either the program, 

or a similar program, will constitute 

preliminary evidence and will meet 

CNCS’s criteria. Examples of research 

that meet the standards include: (1) 

Outcome studies that track program 

participants through a service ‘pipeline’ 

and measure participants’ responses at 

the end of the program; and (2) pre- and 

post-test research that determines 

whether participants have improved on 

an outcome of interest. In future years, 

CNCS may expand its standard for 

preliminary evidence to include 

reasonable hypotheses that are based on 

theories of change. 

II. Award Information 

A. How much funding is available? 

Subject to the availability of 

appropriations for FY 2011, CNCS 

anticipates awarding up to $XX million 

to approximately five to ten new Social 

Innovation Fund intermediary 

organizations. Based on recent 

experience and expressions of interest, 

CNCS anticipates that this Social 

Innovation Fund grant competition will 

be highly competitive. 

B. What is the award amount? 

For the FY 2011 Social Innovation 

Fund award competition, CNCS expects 

to make annual awards in the range of 

$1 million to $7 million. CNCS expects 

to make larger grants to those 

intermediary organizations with a track 

record of supporting subgrantees with 

strong evidence and impact (as 

described in Section V of this Notice) 

and the capacity to support replication 

or expansion. 

C. What is the award period? 

The award period is up to five years, 

with funding provided in annual 

increments, subject to availability of 

annual appropriations. Grantees will be 

eligible for continuation funding in the 

second through fifth year, contingent on 

the availability of appropriations, 

compliance with grant conditions, and 

satisfactory performance, including 

having secured sufficient matching 

funds. 

III. Eligibility Information 

A. What are the eligibility criteria? 

This competition is open to all 

entities that meet the following 

compliance and eligibility criteria. 

Receipt of previous funding from CNCS 

or other Federal agencies is not a 

prerequisite to applying under this 

Notice. 

In order to be compliant and eligible 

for review, an applicant must: 

1. Meet specific compliance 

requirements including: 

• Include a budget that reflects a 

Federal share of between $1 million and 

$7 million; 

• Include a budget that reflects a plan 

to distribute at least 80 percent of 

awarded Federal funds to subgrantees; 

• Submit application in a timely 

manner as provided in this Notice; 

• Submit an application that is 

complete, in that it contains all required 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81984 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

elements and follows the instructions 

provided in this Notice. 

2. Demonstrate either cash-on-hand or 

commitments (or a combination thereof) 

toward meeting 50 percent of the 

required first year matching funds, 

based on the amount of grant funds 

requested. 

At the time of submission of the 

application, applicants must 

demonstrate either cash-on-hand or 

commitments (or a combination thereof) 

toward meeting 50 percent of their first 

year matching funds, based on the 

amount of Federal grant funds applied 

for. For example, a request of $1 million 

needs to be accompanied by 

documentation of having $500,000 in 

cash on-hand or commitments at the 

time of application. Instructions for how 

to provide documentation of match are 

provided in section IV. 

In order to be eligible for award, an 

applicant must: 

1. Be an existing grantmaking 

institution or an eligible partnership; 

Existing grantmaking institutions are 

organizations in existence at the time of 

the application, which invest in 

nonprofit community organizations or 

programs as an essential (rather than 

collateral) means of fulfilling their 

mission and vision. 

In keeping with this view, 

grantmaking institutions will generally 

have the following as part of their core 

operating functions: 

• Conducting open or otherwise 

competitive programs to award grants to 

or make investments in a diverse 

portfolio of nonprofit community 

organizations; 

• Negotiating specific grant 

requirements with nonprofit community 

organizations; and 

• Overseeing and monitoring the 

performance of grantees. 

An eligible partnership is a formal 

relationship between an existing 

grantmaking institution (as defined 

above) and either an additional 

grantmaking institution, a State 

Commission on National and 

Community Service (State Commission), 

or a chief executive officer of a unit of 

general local government where the 

partner organizations will share 

responsibilities under the award. In a 

cooperative agreement with a 

partnership, CNCS would expect to be 

dealing with each partner organization 

with some degree of independence 

concerning their collective 

responsibilities. For example, a 

partnership could include one 

organization that handles all aspects of 

a Social Innovation Fund program 

related to evaluation, while another 

organization handles all aspects related 

to finances and grant administration. 

Other collaborations (which may be 

similar to consultant or contractor 

arrangements), where an organization 

obtains access to needed competencies, 

but remains fully responsible for 

performance of the cooperative 

agreement, will not be treated as 

partnerships for purposes of 

determining eligibility. Please see the 

description of successful 2010 Social 

Innovation Fund grantees for examples 

of existing grantmaking institutions and 

eligible partnerships. 

2. Declare its status as either a 

geographically-based or issue-based 

Social Innovation Fund that will focus 

on improving measurable outcomes; 

CNCS asks applicants to use a 

thematic approach in describing their 

proposed investments in community 

organizations. As established in section 

198K of the Act, there are two basic 

operational models of Social Innovation 

Fund intermediaries. The first is a 

Social Innovation Fund that will operate 

in a single geographic location, and 

address one or more priority issues 

within that location. This model is 

referred to as a ‘‘geographically-based 

Social Innovation Fund.’’ The second 

model is a Social Innovation Fund that 

will address a single priority issue area 

in multiple geographic locations. This 

model is referred to as an ‘‘issue-based 

Social Innovation Fund.’’ CNCS will 

assess whether the application properly 

proposes goals and objectives as either 

a geographically-based or an issue-based 

Social Innovation Fund. 

Geographically-Based Social Innovation 

Fund 

To apply as a geographically-based 

Social Innovation Fund, the applicant 

must propose to focus on serving lowincome communities within a specific 

local geographic area, and propose to 

focus on improving measurable 

outcomes related to one or more of the 

following priority issue areas: 

• Youth Development. 

• Economic Opportunity. 

• Healthy Futures. 

Issue-Based Social Innovation Fund 

To apply as an issue-based Social 

Innovation Fund, the applicant must 

propose to focus on addressing one of 

the following priority issue areas within 

multiple low-income communities: 

• Youth Development. 

• Economic Opportunity. 

• Healthy Futures. 

3. Have a track record of using 

evidence to select, invest in, validate, 

and support the replication and 

expansion of grantees. 

Applicants must include information 

in their application that describes their 

track record of using evidence, data, and 

evaluation tools to: 

• Select and invest in subgrantees; 

• Validate the effectiveness of 

subgrantees; 

• Support, monitor, and evaluate the 

replication and expansion of 

subgrantees; and 

• Achieve measurable outcomes. 

4. Have a clearly-articulated plan to: 

• Select, replicate and expand 

subgrantees that have been shown to 

have at least preliminary evidence of 

effectiveness; and 

• Collaborate with a research 

organization to undertake rigorous 

evaluations to move subgrantees to at 

least moderate levels of evidence. 

5. Have appropriate policies on 

conflicts of interest, self-dealing, and 

other improper practices. 

Applicants must explain within the 

Program Design section of their 

application how they have, or will, put 

measures in place that will prevent 

conflict of interest, opportunities for 

self-dealing, and other improper 

practices from occurring, specifically 

during the competitive subgrant 

selection process. 

B. How will eligibility criteria be 

applied? 

CNCS will conduct a compliance 

review of applications to determine 

whether they meet the compliance 

criteria listed above. Applications’ 

executive summaries will then be 

screened through an initial eligibility 

review which will confirm whether the 

applicant meets eligibility criteria 1 and 

2 listed above. The compliance and 

initial eligibility reviews will not 

involve reading the entire application. 

Any application that does not meet each 

of these four initial criteria will be 

considered nonresponsive to this Notice 

and will not be further reviewed. 

The remaining applications will be 

reviewed as described in this Notice. 

The review will include an evaluation 

of the final three eligibility criteria 

above as part of the overall review 

process. In addition, and as necessary, 

CNCS will further evaluate an applicant 

during clarifying discussions (and 

possible site visits) with applicants. 

CNCS also anticipates conducting due 

diligence reviews to assess or confirm 

information or assurances provided by 

applicants. As part of these application 

reviews, further discussions and any 

due diligence reviews, CNCS may 

conclude that an application does not 

meet one or more of the eligibility 

criteria listed above, in which case the 

application will be considered 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81985 

nonresponsive and will not be further 

considered. 

C. Can existing social innovation fund 

grantees apply under this Notice? 

Existing Social Innovation Fund 

grantees may apply under this Notice, 

but their application must seek funding 

for a program that is distinct from the 

program currently being funded. An 

application to expand a current Social 

Innovation Fund supported program 

into different geographical areas will not 

be considered an application for a 

distinct program. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

This section is divided into two parts. 

The first part explains when and how 

applications should be submitted. The 

second part provides explicit guidance 

for the application narratives that must 

be submitted as a part of an application. 

Part 1. Application Submission 

Information 

A. When are applications due? 

Applications are due no later than 

5 p.m. ET on XXXX. Applications must 

arrive at CNCS by the deadline in order 

to be considered. 

B. Where can I request application 

information? 

This Notice may be found on CNCS’s 

Web site: http:// 

www.nationalservice.gov/about/ 

programs/innovation.asp. 

C. What is a DUNS number and is it 

required? 

The Dun and Bradstreet Data 

Universal Numbering System (DUNS) 

number is an identifier that helps the 

Federal government improve statistical 

reports on Federal grants and 

cooperative agreements. Applications 

must include a DUNS number on the 

Application for Federal Assistance 

(Standard Form 424). The DUNS 

number does not replace your Employer 

Identification Number. DUNS numbers 

may be obtained at no cost by calling 

the DUNS number request line at (866) 

705–5711, or by applying online at 

http://www.dnb.com. 

The Web site indicates a 24-hour 

e-mail turnaround time on requests for 

DUNS numbers. However, we suggest 

registering at least 30 days in advance 

of the application due date. Expedited 

DUNS numbers may be obtained by 

telephone at a cost of $99 by calling the 

DUNS number request line. 

Applications without DUNS numbers or 

with invalid DUNS numbers will be 

rejected. A DUNS number is required to 

apply for this funding opportunity. 

D. How do I submit an application? 

CNCS requires that all applicants 

submit their applications electronically 

via CNCS’s Web-based application 

system, eGrants. 

Applications must arrive at CNCS by 

XXXX at 5 p.m. ET in order to be 

considered. CNCS reserves the right to 

extend the submission deadline. Any 

notice of such extended deadline will be 

posted in eGrants. 

We recommend that applicants create 

an eGrants account and begin the 

application at least three weeks before 

the deadline and begin pasting your 

application into eGrants no later than 

ten days before the deadline. Applicants 

should draft the application as a word 

processing document, then copy and 

paste the document into eGrants no later 

than 10 days before the deadline. 

Contact the eGrants Help Desk at 888– 

677–7849 or e-mail egrantshelp@cns.gov 

if a problem arises while creating an 

account, preparing, or submitting an 

application. Be prepared to provide 

your application ID and organization’s 

name. eGrants Help Desk hours are 

8 p.m. ET Monday through Friday. 

If technical issues are preventing you 

from submitting your application in 

eGrants by the deadline, please contact 

the eGrants Help Desk prior the 

deadline to explain the technical issue 

and receive a ticket number. If the issue 

cannot be resolved by the deadline, the 

applicant must continue working with 

the eGrants Help Desk to submit via 

eGrants. 

E. Will late applications be considered? 

CNCS may consider an application 

after the deadline, but only if the 

applicant submits a letter explaining the 

extenuating circumstance which caused 

the delay. The letter must be sent to 

LateApplications@cns.gov within the 

24-hour period following the deadline. 

Late applications are evaluated on a 

case-by-case basis. 

If extenuating circumstances make the 

use of eGrants impossible, applicants 

may send a hard copy of the application 

to the address below in Section VI, 

Agency Contacts, via overnight carrier. 

Please use a non-U.S. Postal Service 

because of security-related delays in 

receiving mail from the U.S. Postal 

Service. All deadlines and requirements 

in this Notice apply to hard copy 

applications. Hard copy applications 

must include a cover letter detailing the 

circumstances that make it impossible 

to submit via e-Grants. 

Do not submit supplementary 

materials such as videos, brochures, 

letters of support, or any other item not 

requested in this Notice. CNCS will not 

review or return them. 

F. How is an application created in 

eGrants? 

If you need help establishing a new 

organization account in eGrants, or a 

new user account for an existing 

organization account, please refer to the 

eGrants Help Desk Web site: http:// 

www.nationalservice.gov/egrants/ 

help.asp. 

After you create your eGrants account, 

begin by selecting ‘‘New’’ under the 

Creating an Application heading on 

your Home Page. Select ‘‘Other’’ as the 

Program Area and click ‘‘Go.’’ You will 

then be asked to select a NOFA. Choose: 

Social Innovation Fund 2011. Once you 

create an application, you will be 

allowed to edit as needed until you are 

ready to submit. 

Do not use the New button again as 

this will start a brand new application. 

Once you have initiated an application, 

it will be listed in the View My Grants/ 

Applications section of the homepage 

under the status: Grantee Edit of 

Application or Report. If you exit and 

then return to eGrants and wish to 

continue entering or editing your 

application, please open your saved 

version by selecting View My Grants/ 

Applications in the status Grantee Edit 

of Application or Report. 

G. What must be included in an 

application? 

This Notice contains all application 

instructions and is available at http:// 

www.nationalservice.gov/about/ 

programs/innovation.asp. 

The application must provide a welldesigned plan with a clear and 

compelling justification for awarding 

the requested funds. Guidance for 

completing the narrative sections is 

provided below. In evaluating your 

application, reviewers will assess the 

narrative on the basis of your program 

design, organizational capacity, and 

budget adequacy/cost effectiveness. 

Application Instructions are formatted 

to correspond to fields in eGrants and 

clarified through this Notice. 

The completed application will 

consist of the following components, 

described in detail below: 

1. Standard Form 424 (SF–424) 

Facesheet 

2. Narratives (OMB Control# 3045– 

0129, Expiration Date 11/30/2011) 

• Executive Summary. 

• Program Design. 

• Organizational Capacity. 

• Cost-Effectiveness and Budget 

Adequacy. 

3. Standard Form 424A Budget 

4. Authorization, Assurances, and 

Certifications 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81986 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

5. Survey on Ensuring Equal 

Opportunity (Optional; OMB Control# 

1894–0010, Expiration Date 5/31/2012) 

1. Standard Form 424 Facesheet 

The Standard Form-424 Facesheet is 

required for applications submitted for 

Federal assistance. The SF–424 contents 

are duplicated in eGrants, although the 

format is different. 

Please note that the SF–424 is 

automatically generated by completing 

the data elements in the eGrants system. 

When completing the application in 

eGrants, many of the fields will be 

populated with information entered 

during the organization’s registration 

process. 

Applicant Info 

Please note that the Authorized 

Representative name is blank. You 

cannot select a name for this field. 

Instead, the Authorized Representative 

will need to have his/her own account 

to click on the Assurances and 

Certifications at the end of the 

application. (Attachment A) 

Under Project Information select, 

‘‘Enter New’’ and choose a title for the 

proposed project. It is possible to enter 

another address for the project, which 

may or not be the same as that of the 

Legal Applicant. 

Select a Project Initiative: Choose the 

operational model which best describes 

your Social Innovation Fund 

application from the following options: 

SIF—Geographic Healthy Futures. 

SIF—Geographic Opportunity. 

SIF—Geographic Youth. 

SIF—Geographic Multiple Issues. 

SIF—Issue Area Healthy Futures. 

SIF—Issue Area Opportunity. 

SIF—Issue Area Youth. 

To select an individual as the Project 

Director, choose a name from the pulldown menu or add a new contact. 

Application Info 

Areas affected by the project: List 

only the largest political or municipal 

entities affected (e.g., counties and 

cities). 

Enter the dates for the proposed 

project start and end dates. Your project 

period is up to five years and must 

begin no later than September 30, 2011. 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs: This program is NOT subject 

to Executive Order 12372. 

Delinquent on any Federal debt: 

Check the appropriate box. This 

question applies to the applicant 

organization, not the person who signs 

as the authorized representative. 

Categories of debt include delinquent 

audit allowances, loans, and taxes. If 

Yes, type your explanation in the text 

box provided. 

State Application Identifier: 

Enter N/A. 

Note: Falsification or concealment of a 

material fact or submission of false, fictitious 

or fraudulent statements or representations to 

any department or agency of the United 

States. Government may result in a fine or 

imprisonment for not more than five (5) 

years, or both. (18 U.S.C. 1001). 

2. Narrative Section 

The application narrative comprises 

four separate sections. Content 

guidelines for each of these narrative 

sections, including character limits and 

content requirements, are provided later 

in this section of the Notice. The four 

sections include: 

1. Executive Summary 

2. Program Design 

A. Goals and Objectives 

B. Description of Activities 

C. Use of Evidence 

D. Community Resources 

3. Organizational Capacity 

A. Ability to Provide Program 

Oversight 

B. Ability to Provide Fiscal Oversight 

4. Cost-Effectiveness and Budget 

Adequacy 

A. Budget and Program Design 

B. Match Sources 

3. Standard Form 424A Budget 

Budget—Year One 

The budget should describe how grant 

funds will be used to effectively support 

activities described in the proposal 

narrative. Do not include unexplained 

amounts, amounts for miscellaneous or 

contingency costs, or unallowable 

expenses such as entertainment costs. 

Round all figures to the nearest dollar. 

Refer to the Federal cost principles at: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

circulars/index.html for information on 

allowable costs in Federal grants. 

We recommend you prepare your 

project budget off-line before entering it 

into eGrants. EGrants will create the 

budget and the budget narrative 

automatically from the detailed budget 

information you enter. 

Budget Section 1 Categories: 

Project Personnel Expenses. 

Personnel Fringe Benefits. 

Travel—Please include adequate 

funding for travel for at least two staff 

member to 2 CNCS convenings and 1 

financial training. For the sake of 

planning purposes, assume that 

meetings will take place in Washington, 

DC. 

Equipment (individual items over 

$5,000). 

Supplies. 

Contractual and Consultant Services. 

Other (all subgrant costs are included 

in the line titled, ‘‘Subgrants’’). 

Budget Section 2 Categories: 

Source of Matching Funds. 

Federally Approved Indirect Costs. 

You will be prevented from validating 

your budget in eGrants if you do not 

meet the dollar-for-dollar, cash match. 

You will receive an error message that 

states, ‘‘Grantee share must be greater 

than or equal to CNCS share.’’ 

4. Authorization, Assurances, and 

Certifications 

eGrants requires that you review and 

verify your entire application before 

submitting, by completing the following 

sections in eGrants: 

• Review. 

• Authorize. 

• Assurances. 

• Certifications. 

• Verify. 

• Submit. 

Read the Authorization, Assurances, 

and Certifications carefully (Attachment 

A). The person who authorizes the 

application must be the applicant’s 

Authorized Representative or his/her 

designee and must have an active 

eGrants account to sign these 

documents electronically. An 

Authorized Representative is the person 

in your organization authorized to 

accept and commit funds on behalf of 

the organization. A copy of the 

governing body’s authorization for this 

official representative to sign must be on 

file in the applicant’s office. 

Be sure to check your entire 

application to make sure that there are 

no errors before submitting it. eGrants 

will also generate a list of errors if there 

are sections that need to be corrected 

prior to submission when you verify the 

application. If someone else is acting in 

the role of the applicant’s authorized 

representative, that person must log into 

his/her eGrants account to proceed with 

Authorize and Submit. After signing off 

on the Authorization, Assurances, and 

Certifications, his/her name will 

override any previous signatory that 

may appear and show on the 

application as the Authorized 

Representative. 

Note: Anyone within your organization 

who will be entering information in the 

application at any point during application 

preparation and submission in the eGrants 

system must have their own eGrants account. 

Individuals may establish an eGrants account 

by accessing this link: https:// 

egrants.cns.gov/espan/main/login.jsp and 

selecting ‘‘Don’t have an eGrants account? 

Create an account.’’ 

5. Survey on Ensuring Equal 

Opportunity (Optional) 

Applicants are asked to complete the 

Survey on Ensuring Equal Opportunity 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81987 

for Applicants. The survey can be found 

at: http://www.americorps.gov/pdf/

CNCS_2007_EO_survey.doc. 

Submission of the survey is not 

required. 

G. Is this funding opportunity subject to 

intergovernmental review? 

Applicants under this program are not 

subject to Executive Order 12372 

‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs.’’ 

H. What are the funding restrictions? 

Budget Requirements 

Applicants must submit a proposed 

first year budget that includes both 

Federal and match funding as part of 

their application. If an application is 

selected for award, CNCS will 

determine the final amount of the award 

of Federal funds, and will negotiate a 

final budget. Upon award, compliance 

with the approved budget will be a 

material term and condition of the 

cooperative agreement with the Social 

Innovation Fund intermediary. 

Proposed and final budgets may only 

include allowable costs as defined in 

the applicable cost principles for the 

award recipient— 

• 2 CFR Part 220—Cost Principles for 

Educational Institutions (OMB Circular 

A–21). 

• 2 CFR Part 225—Cost Principles for 

State, Local and Tribal Governments 

(OMB Circular A–87). 

• 2 CFR Part 230—Cost Principles for 

Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular 

A–122). 

Applicants who have not previously 

applied for Federal grant funds should 

understand that ‘‘allowable costs’’ under 

Federal awards do not necessarily 

include all costs that the organization 

will incur in order to perform their 

awards. For example, the costs of raising 

funds in order to meet the nonfederal 

share of the budget (‘‘matching funds’’) 

are not allowable costs under OMB cost 

principles. The cost principles 

implement long standing governmentwide policy decisions on the use of 

Federal grant funds and applicants 

should ensure that they are fully aware 

of requirements in the applicable OMB 

circular while preparing their budgets. 

The proposed and final budgets may 

only include actual expenditures by the 

applicant organization. The value of any 

in-kind goods or services provided to 

the applicant cannot be included in the 

proposed or final budgets. The budgets 

will allocate allowable costs to either 

the Federal or non-Federal share of the 

total budget. At least 80 percent of the 

Federal share must be awarded to 

subgrantees; the balance may go toward 

the intermediary’s program support 

costs, including evaluation, knowledge 

management, and Social Innovation 

Fund implementation. 

The non-Federal share of the budget 

must equal or exceed the Federal share 

of the budget (this implements the 

dollar-for-dollar cash match 

requirement). There is no requirement 

that the non-Federal share of the budget 

‘‘mirror’’ or be allocated on the same 

basis as the Federal share of the budget. 

However, CNCS is particularly 

interested in applicants that raise 

additional dollars to be provided to the 

subgrantees, and in applicants that 

propose to award the majority of their 

matching funds to subgrantees through 

their competitive subgrant selection 

process. 

As described in the OMB cost 

principles, applicant budgets (other 

than the amounts budgeted for 

subgrants) will include a combination of 

direct or indirect costs. Applicants with 

approved indirect cost rates for Federal 

grants must use those rates for any 

indirect costs they include in their 

budgets. CNCS will work with 

applicants selected for award who do 

not have approved Federal indirect cost 

rates to help them develop and obtain 

approval for their rates. 

Matching Funds 

The non-Federal share of the budget 

represents the dollar-for-dollar matching 

funds requirement under this Notice. 

Any organization that receives an award 

under this Notice is responsible for 

securing the necessary matching funds. 

Matching funds may come from State, 

local, or private sources, which may 

include State or local agencies, 

businesses, private philanthropic 

organizations, or individuals. Federal 

funds, including Federal block grants 

being distributed by State or local 

governments, may not be used towards 

the match requirement, except under 

very specific circumstances. 

Additionally: 

• If the applicant is an eligible 

partnership that includes a State 

Commission or a local government 

office, the State or local government 

involved must provide not less than 30 

percent and not more than 50 percent of 

the matching funds. 

• CNCS is particularly interested in 

applicants that demonstrate that Federal 

funds are generating additional or new 

private sector funds. 

• CNCS is also particularly interested 

in applicants that present both a strong 

capacity to raise additional dollars to be 

provided to subgrantees, and a serious 

commitment to share the fundraising 

burden for their subgrantees. 

I. Where should match verification 

documents be submitted? 

Social Innovation Fund applicants 

must demonstrate the ability to meet 50 

percent of their cash match requirement 

at the time of the application. Signed 

letters verifying match, as well as all 

other required documentation, can be 

sent via e-mail to SociallInnovationl

FundApplication@cns.gov or via 

overnight carrier (non-U.S. Postal 

Service because of security-related 

delays in receiving mail from the U.S. 

Postal Service) to the following address: 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service, ATT: Office of 

Grants Policy and Operations/Social 

Innovation Fund Application, 1201 New 

York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20525. 

When submitting match verification 

by e-mail, applicants should reference 

their application ID and organization 

name in the subject line of their e-mail. 

Match verification, as well as all other 

documentation must be received by the 

deadline on XXXX, 5 p.m. Eastern Time. 

Submission of evidence of match by the 

application deadline is a compliance 

criterion. 

In the FY 2011 Social Innovation 

Fund award competition, CNCS will not 

reduce the match requirement for 

applicants that will be serving 

significantly philanthropically 

underserved communities. 

Part 2. Application Narrative Guidelines 

The following guidelines should be 

used to draft the narrative section of the 

application. These instructions form the 

basis for the review criteria and, along 

with the eligibility criteria, will be used 

by reviewers to evaluate your 

application. 

A. What are the character limits for the 

narrative section? 

For the entire narrative section, the 

maximum character limit is 75,000 or 

approximately 55 double-spaced pages 

using a 12-point font. We recommend 

the following character limit 

disbursements for each component: 

• Executive Summary: Up to 4,500 

characters or approximately 3 doublespaced pages, 12-point font. 

• Program Design: Up to 31,500 

characters or approximately 22.5 

double-spaced pages, 12-point font. 

• Organizational Capacity: Up to 

24,500 characters or approximately 17.5 

double-spaced pages, 12-point font. 

• Cost-Effectiveness and Budget 

Adequacy: Up to 14,000 characters or 

approximately 10 double-spaced pages, 

12-point font. 

Please note that character limits 

include spaces. When drafting narrative 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81988 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

responses, we recommend using word 

processing software that will check 

spelling and count characters. Use only 

uppercase letters for all section 

headings and other information you 

would like to highlight in your 

narrative. Bold face, bullets, underlines, 

or other types of formatting, charts, 

diagrams, and tables will not copy into 

eGrants. 

B. What should be included in the 

Executive Summary? 

The Executive Summary should be 

completed using the following guide. 

Executive summaries for all 

applications considered for funding will 

be made public and posted to CNCS’s 

Web site. Executive summaries will be 

used in the initial eligibility review to 

assess applicants’ status as: (1) An 

existing grantmaking institution or an 

eligible partnership; and (2) to confirm 

its identification as either a 

geographically-based or issue-based 

Social Innovation Fund. 

Title: 

For the title of your Executive 

Summary, applicants should use the 

name of the sole or lead intermediary (if 

an eligible partnership) 

Contents: 

Applicants should provide a summary 

of the proposed program including the 

following: 

• Basic Information: 

—Demonstrate that the applicant is an 

existing grantmaking institution or 

eligible partnership; 

—Identify as either a geographicallybased Social Innovation Fund or 

issue-based Social Innovation Fund; 

—Identify priority issue area(s) of focus; 

—Identify key measurable outcomes 

your program will improve; 

—Identify specific local geographic 

areas where subgrantees are likely to 

be located (if applying as an issuebased Social Innovation Fund); 

—Identify key implementation partners 

(if you are applying as an eligible 

partnership, clearly identify the other 

members of your partnership); 

—Identify the grant amount you are 

requesting and your proposed grant 

period; and 

—Identify the key sources of match you 

have secured. 

• Project Overview: 

—Provide an overview of your proposed 

program and the need(s) your program 

will meet; 

—Describe the specific issue area(s) you 

will address and the measurable 

outcomes you propose to improve; 

—Provide an overview of your proposed 

competitive subgrant selection 

process and what you hope to 

achieve, including how you plan to 

use evidence of effectiveness to 

identify and select subgrantees; 

—Describe your track record of using 

rigorous evidence to select grantees; 

validate potentially effective programs 

and practices, and support and 

evaluate the replication and 

expansion of grantees; 

—Describe what support and assistance 

you will provide selected subgrantees 

in terms of operations, performance 

measurement, and evaluation; and 

—Identify major sources of match you 

have secured. 

C. What should be included in the 

Program Design section? 

1. Goals and Objectives 

In this section, applicants should 

identify and describe the key objectives 

of their Social Innovation Fund, as well 

as the theory of change and overall 

approach to selecting and supporting 

subgrantees they are proposing in order 

to achieve their objectives. 

First, applicants must identify 

themselves as either a geographicallybased Social Innovation Fund or an 

issue-based Social Innovation Fund, as 

defined in this Notice. For either type, 

your narrative should include 

additional information as noted below. 

Geographically-Based Social Innovation 

Fund 

The application must do the 

following: 

• Describe the target community, 

State or region that you propose to 

serve; 

• Describe the specific priority issue 

area(s) on which you propose to focus— 

i.e. Youth Development, Economic 

Opportunity, and/or Healthy Futures— 

and the statistical information that 

supports this focus; 

• Provide statistics on the needs 

related to the issue area(s) within the 

specific local geographic area; 

• Describe the specific measurable 

outcomes you propose to improve; and 

• Describe the availability of relevant 

data and your approach to assess 

whether your investments caused 

improvement in the proposed 

measurable outcomes. 

Issue-Based Social Innovation Fund: 

The application must do the 

following: 

• Describe the specific issue area on 

which you propose to focus—i.e. Youth 

Development, Economic Opportunity, 

and/or Healthy Futures; 

• Describe the target geographies—i.e. 

communities, States or regions—which 

you are likely to serve and your 

rationale for selecting these particular 

geographies; 

• Provide statistics on the needs 

related to the issue area within the 

geographic areas likely to be served, 

including statistics demonstrating that 

those geographic areas have a high need 

in the issue area; 

• Describe the measurable outcomes 

related to the issue area you propose to 

improve; and 

• Describe the availability of relevant 

data and your approach to assess 

whether your investments caused 

improvement in the proposed 

measurable outcomes. 

Second, applicants must describe the 

theory of change relevant to their 

proposed program and the investment 

strategy they intend to employ. 

Applicants should convey an 

intentional approach to solving 

community problems through their 

subgrant investments and clearly 

explain (1) the types of organizations 

they will invest in and why, and (2) the 

value-added activities, including 

technical assistance or other services, 

they will provide their subgrantees in 

order to align them with the theory of 

change and achieve the desired 

outcomes. 

2. Description of Activities 

Subgranting 

In this section of the narrative, 

applicants must describe the process by 

which they will identify and 

competitively select their nonprofit 

community organization subgrantees in 

their targeted geographies. Specifically, 

applicants must describe how their 

competitive subgrant selection process 

will ensure a portfolio of high-quality 

subgrantees, with particular attention to 

their level of evidence (preliminary 

required) and relationships with and 

proposed engagement of experts, 

leaders, and community stakeholders in 

relevant domains. Applicants should 

explain how their subgrant selection 

process meets the definition of a 

competitive subgrant competition as 

defined in this Notice. The plan should 

also include: 

• The estimated number or range of 

subgrant awards that will be made; 

• The estimated range of subgrant 

award amounts; 

• A description of: 

Æ On what basis the amount of each 

subgrant award will be determined. 

Please note: the Social Innovation Fund 

expects that the level of evidence 

demonstrated by subgrantees will be a 

key criterion, with larger sums being 

allocated to organizations with higher 

levels of evidence; 

Æ How key subgrant eligibility criteria 

required by this Notice will be 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81989 

determined (particularly the level of 

subgrantee evidence); 

Æ The proposed review and selection 

process; and 

Æ Who will review grant applications 

and how the process will ensure 

appropriate conflict of interest policies 

are in place. 

Please note, the proposed subgrant 

plan and timeline must demonstrate 

that it can be completed within six 

months of grant award. 

The proposed subgrant competitions 

should produce high-quality 

subgrantees that are innovative 

nonprofit community organizations 

serving low-income communities. These 

organizations should possess: 

• A strong theory of change; 

• Strong leadership and financial and 

management systems, including data 

management; 

• A strong financial position, 

including funding diversity, the ability 

to meet the requirements for providing 

dollar-for-dollar matching funds, and 

the ability to sustain the initiative after 

the subgrant period concludes; 

• Strong community relationships; 

• A commitment to and track record 

of using data and evaluation for 

performance and program improvement; 

• At least preliminary evidence of 

effectiveness, including a demonstrated 

track record of achieving specific 

measurable outcomes related to the 

measurable outcomes for the 

intermediary; 

• Strong potential for and interest in 

replication or expansion; 

• A well-defined plan for achieving 

specific measurable outcomes 

connected to the measurable outcomes 

for the intermediary, evaluation of 

program effectiveness, performance 

improvement, and replication or 

expansion; and 

• A commitment to use grant funds to 

replicate, expand, or support their 

programs. 

Please note that, in contrast to the FY 

2010 Social Innovation Fund 

competition, pre-selected subgrantees 

will no longer be accepted. All 

subgrantees must be selected through 

the open competitive processes 

referenced in this Notice. 

Technical Assistance and Support 

Applicants must include in their 

application information describing how 

they will provide technical assistance 

and support (other than financial 

support) that will increase the ability of 

subgrantees to achieve their measurable 

outcomes, including performance 

measurement, evaluation, validation, 

and replication or expansion. 

Replication or expansion may happen in 

various ways (including, for example, 

creating new sites or affiliating with 

another program to replicate an 

intervention) and in multiple contexts 

(including, for example, serving more 

people in a current geography or 

growing to new geographies). In this 

section of the narrative, you should: 

• Describe your commitment to longterm relationships with subgrantees, 

including the process by which you 

establish shared short- and long-term 

goals and communicate and negotiate 

modifications; 

• Describe your plan for subgrantee 

monitoring; 

• Explain what resources and support 

you will provide to build subgrantee 

capacity in key areas, such as leadership 

development, financial management, 

data management, strategic planning, 

and communications; 

• Describe how you will facilitate 

learning and improvement across your 

portfolio of subgrantees; 

• Describe your proposed approach to 

supporting your subgrantees in 

achieving their match requirements and 

on-going sustainability; and 

• Describe your proposed approach to 

accountability for subgrantees and 

yourself. Provide examples of and 

justification for potential subgranteelevel and intermediary-level metrics. 

3. Use of Evidence 

The Social Innovation Fund is one of 

several new Federal grant programs that 

place a significant emphasis on using 

evidence of program impact as a critical 

factor in funding decisions, with the 

goal of directing limited public 

resources toward more effective 

programs and increasing our knowledge 

about what works to get results in 

communities. 

Intermediaries will need to 

demonstrate in their applications how 

they use evidence of program impact to 

select, invest in, validate and support 

the replication and expansion of their 

subgrantees. Across programs, issue 

areas, and regions, the available 

evidence of program effectiveness will 

necessarily vary, sometimes 

significantly. However, the best 

evidence will come from independent, 

well-designed studies using 

experimental and quasi-experimental 

designs, ideally from more than one site 

or with more than one population, that 

demonstrate the program has had a 

strong impact. Where these types of 

evidence are not available, the 

intermediaries will be expected to 

identify the existing levels of evidence 

of subgrantees and to use Social 

Innovation Fund resources to help 

validate the effectiveness of these 

programs through ongoing performance 

measurement and evaluation. In 

addition, CNCS expects that the use of 

rigorous evidence will be part of the 

culture of the intermediary, and that, 

consequently, the intermediary will 

assess the impact of its own activities. 

In this section of the narrative, you 

should: 

• Describe situations in which your 

organization has applied evidence 

produced by rigorous evaluations in 

decision-making with respect to specific 

programs at either the preliminary, 

moderate, or strong levels; 

• Describe the process your 

organization uses to incorporate 

evidence into the selection, investment, 

validation, and support of replication, 

and expansion of your grantees; 

• Offer specific examples of how your 

organization has used rigorous evidence 

to drive program improvement and 

increase the base of evidence of what 

works; 

• Describe the study or studies that 

generated the evidence and the evidence 

that was derived from the evaluation(s), 

and provide Web links to recent 

published or unpublished full report(s) 

(preferably, the reports will include 

design and methodology 

documentation—links to executive 

summaries or journal articles are not 

sufficient); 

• Describe your plan for using 

evidence, data, and evaluation tools to: 

Æ Select and invest in subgrantees. 

Æ Validate the effectiveness of 

grantees. 

Æ Support and monitor the 

replication and expansion of 

subgrantees. 

Æ Achieve measurable outcomes. 

• Describe which level of evidence 

(defined in section II of this Notice) you 

will use for subgrantee selection and/or 

which level of evidence and impact you 

will assist your subgrantees in achieving 

(please note: all subgrantees must have 

plans in place to achieve at least 

moderate levels of evidence); 

• Describe how you will help your 

subgrantees invest in improving 

performance improvement and 

achieving at least moderate levels of 

evidence through appropriate data 

collection and evaluation; 

• Describe how you will help 

grantees design performance 

measurement and evaluation systems 

appropriate to the maturity of the 

program (i.e., different approaches for 

validation versus replication or scaling 

up); and 

• Describe your track record of 

sharing and integrating lessons from 

evaluation (both positive and negative 

findings) across grantees. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81990 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

4. Community Resources 

This section is not applicable to the 

Social Innovation Fund competition. 

Applicants should leave this blank. 

D. What should be included in the 

Organizational Capacity section? 

1. Ability To Provide Program Oversight 

Applicants must establish that they 

have the skills and capacities required 

to effectively manage programs of the 

nature they are proposing, including a 

strong track record of selecting, 

investing in and supporting the 

replication and expansion of grantees. 

• Describe your organization’s 

experience in the proposed priority 

issue area(s) of activity and your 

experience operating and overseeing 

programs comparable to the ones 

proposed, including specific examples 

of your prior accomplishments and 

outcomes in these area(s); 

• Provide specific examples of the 

effectiveness of your investment 

approach, including the range of 

replications or expansions that you have 

overseen or sponsored; 

• Describe the kinds of resources 

(e.g., data systems; staff) you have 

available to assist with subgrantee 

replication or expansion; 

• Describe your capacity to 

implement the evaluation plan you have 

proposed; 

• Describe your ability to support and 

oversee multiple programs at different 

locations; 

• Describe your organization’s 

management and staff structure and 

how the Board of directors, 

administrators, and staff members will 

be used; 

• Identify the key program positions 

within your organization relevant to 

your proposed grant program. Describe 

the relevant background and experience 

of key staff members and their 

respective roles, or your plans to recruit, 

select, train, and support additional 

staff, and their proposed roles; 

• Describe your experience 

monitoring subgrantees for site 

compliance against programmatic 

requirements; and 

• Describe your capacity to manage a 

Federal grant and to provide on-site 

monitoring of the financial and other 

systems required to administer a Federal 

grant by a subgrantee. 

2. Ability To Provide Financial 

Oversight 

Applicants should describe the extent 

to which your organization, or proposed 

partnership, has key personnel with the 

knowledge, skills, abilities, and 

experience to provide fiscal oversight of 

subgrantees. Additionally, applicants 

should describe any specific experience 

in providing fiscal oversight of 

subgrantees of Federal funds. 

In this section of the narrative you 

should: 

• Describe the experience and 

infrastructure your organization has in 

managing grants from other entities; 

• Identify your current organizational 

budget; 

• Identify what percentage of the 

budget would this grant represent and 

address the implications for your 

organization; and 

• Describe how you will ensure 

compliance with Federal requirements. 

E. What should be included in the CostEffectiveness and Budget Adequacy 

section? 

1. Budget and Program Design 

In this narrative section, applicants 

should: 

• Demonstrate how your program has 

or will obtain diverse non-Federal 

resources for program implementation 

and sustainability; 

• Discuss the adequacy of your 

budget to support your program design 

including how it is sufficient to support 

your program activities and how it is 

linked to your desired outputs and 

outcomes. Specifically, describe and 

quantify in detail the costs associated 

with your proposed competitive 

subgrant selection process, program 

evaluation plans, and technical 

assistance to subgrantees, including 

costs that may be paid for with 

resources other than Federal or 

matching funds; and 

• If program costs will be higher 

because you are proposing to serve areas 

that are significantly philanthropically 

underserved, please explain. 

2. Match Sources 

At the time of submission of the 

application, applicants must 

demonstrate either cash-on-hand or 

commitments (or a combination thereof) 

toward meeting 50 percent their first 

year matching funds. 

Applicants may demonstrate cash-onhand by a statement from the Chief 

Financial Officer or other officer that the 

organization has established a reserve of 

otherwise uncommitted funds for the 

purposes of performing a Social 

Innovation Fund grant. Applicants may 

demonstrate commitments by a dated 

and signed letter from each donor/ 

foundation, indicating the amount of 

funds committed for the specific use of 

supporting the Social Innovation Fund 

grant. Such a letter must contain a firm 

commitment to provide the applicant 

the stated funding upon award of a 

Social Innovation Fund grant by CNCS. 

Please see the section in this Notice 

titled ‘‘Additional Documents—Match 

Verification’’ for further guidance on 

how to submit this documentation. 

In this narrative section, applicants 

should: 

• Include a discussion of the 

additional commitments you plan to 

secure, and how you will secure them. 

In the budget, you must list the sources 

of your match funds; and 

• Describe the extent to which you 

propose to provide matching funds in 

excess of the minimum requirement. 

V. Application Review Information 

A. What are the Selection Criteria for 

these grants? 

In evaluating applications for funding, 

reviewers will assess program design, 

organizational capacity, and costeffectiveness and budget adequacy. The 

weights assigned to each category and 

sub-category are listed in Table 1 below. 

Reviewers will assess application 

narratives against these Selection 

Criteria and weight them accordingly. 

TABLE 1—APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA

Category Percentage Sub-categories 

Part I. Program Design ........................................................................................ 25 Goals and Objectives. 

Description of Activities. 

25 Use of Evidence. 

Part II. Organizational Capacity ........................................................................... 30 Ability to Provide Program Oversight. 

Ability to Provide Fiscal Oversight. 

Part III. Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Adequacy ............................................. 20 Budget and Program Design. 

Match Sources. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81991 

All applications will first be reviewed 

against the compliance and initial 

eligibility criteria outlined in Section III. 

If this review shows that an application 

does not meet any one of the four 

criteria specified, the application will 

not be further reviewed. All eligible 

applications will be fully reviewed and 

assessed based on both the additional 

eligibility and application review 

criteria. 

In reviewing applications submitted 

in response to this Notice, CNCS may 

consider, with respect to any particular 

proposal, the factors and information 

identified in 45 CFR 2522.470. 

Part I. Program Design (50%) 

In assessing Program Design, expert 

reviewers will examine the degree to 

which the applicant clearly describes 

and convincingly addresses the 

narrative guidelines provided in section 

V. Their analysis will include the 

following: 

A. Goals and Objectives 

To what extent did the applicant: 

• Clearly identify the target 

community or geographies which they 

will serve and the target issue(s) their 

programming will focus on? 

• Provide persuasive evidence (i.e. 

statistical information) as to the 

identified need within the geographic 

area(s) listed? 

• Make a persuasive case for the need 

related to the issue area(s) identified (i.e. 

providing statistical information)? 

• Clearly identify specific measurable 

outcomes that will be achieved through 

their proposed program? 

• Make a compelling case for their 

ability to successfully support the focus, 

goals, and approach they propose? 

B. Description of Activities 

1. Subgranting 

To what extent did the applicant: 

• Provide a clear and comprehensive 

plan for carrying out a competitive 

subgrant selection process? 

• Clearly explain how they will 

identify potential grantees that meet at 

least the preliminary evidence of 

effectiveness standard? 

• Describe a subgrant plan that has a 

reasonable chance of success at 

identifying potential subgrantees that 

meet the requirements described in 

section IV of this Notice? 

2. Technical Assistance and Support 

To what extent did the applicant: 

• Provide a compelling plan for 

providing technical assistance and 

support for their selected subgrantee 

portfolio? 

• Describe a clear plan for supporting 

subgrantee capacity development 

including the acquisition of matching 

funds and rigorous program evaluation? 

• Provide a sound plan for 

monitoring subgrantees? 

C. Use of Evidence 

To what extent does the applicant: 

• Demonstrate a strong track record of 

using evidence in past investments? 

• Describe how they use evidence to 

drive program improvement (including 

citations of past studies)? 

• Present persuasive evidence of 

experience using evidence in their past 

grantmaking activities? 

• Provide a persuasive plan for using 

evidence, data, and evaluation tools to 

identify and select their subgrantees 

having at least preliminary levels of 

evidence? 

• Identify the level of evidence they 

will use for subgrantee selection and/or 

which level of evidence or impact 

subgrantees will achieve (note: 

subgrantees must have plans in place to 

achieve at least moderate levels of 

evidence)? 

• Provide a clear plan for assisting 

subgrantees to reach this level of 

evidence or impact through successful 

data collection and evaluation systems? 

• Describe how they will help 

grantees design performance 

measurement and evaluation systems 

appropriate to the maturity of the 

program (i.e., different approaches for 

validation versus replication or scaling 

up)? 

D. Community Resources 

Not applicable. 

Part II. Organizational Capacity (30%) 

In assessing the organizational 

capacity section, expert reviewers will 

assess to what extent does the applicant: 

• Describe a sound organizational 

structure including experienced staff? 

• Cite specific examples of the 

effectiveness of their past investment 

approach? 

• Have experience or the capacity to 

successfully implement their proposed 

program (i.e. subgrant plan, technical 

assistance, and monitoring)? 

• Have experience or capacity to 

successfully implement their proposed 

evaluation plan? 

• Have experience or the capacity to 

successfully implement a Federal grant? 

Part III. Cost-Effectiveness and Budget 

Adequacy (20%) 

A. Budget and Program Design 

In evaluating the cost effectiveness 

and budget adequacy section, expert 

reviewers will assess: 

• Whether your program is costeffective based on: 

Æ The extent to which your program 

demonstrates diverse, non-Federal 

resources for program implementation 

and sustainability; 

Æ The extent to which you are 

proposing to provide more than the 

minimum required share of the costs of 

your program; and 

Æ Whether the reasonable and 

necessary costs of your program or 

project are higher because you are 

proposing to serve areas that are 

significantly philanthropically 

underserved. 

• Whether your budget is adequate to 

support your program design. 

B. Match Sources 

At the time of submission of the 

application, applicants must 

demonstrate either cash-on-hand or 

commitments (or a combination thereof) 

toward meeting 50 percent of their first 

year matching funds, based on the 

amount of Federal grant funds applied 

for. 

B. What additional considerations will 

CNCS take into account during the 

review process? 

In selecting applicants to receive 

awards under this Notice, CNCS will 

endeavor to include: 

• Applicants who propose to serve 

areas that are significantly 

philanthropically underserved (defined 

in this Notice as rural, low-income 

communities), and 

• A diverse set of applicants, in terms 

of geography and priority issue area. 

C. What are the stages in the review and 

selection process? 

1. Compliance Review 

Corporation staff will review all 

applications to determine compliance 

with match, deadline, and completeness 

requirements identified in Section 

III.A.1 of this Notice. Applications that 

are submitted by the deadline, that are 

complete, and have demonstrated that 

they meet the match requirement will 

advance to the Initial Eligibility Review. 

2. Initial Eligibility Review 

Corporation staff will review all 

compliant applications to determine 

that they are submitted by eligible 

organizations, and that they have 

adequately identified what type of 

Social Innovation Fund program is 

being proposed (i.e. issue-based or 

geographic-based). This review will not 

include reading the entire application. 

Applicants that meet these two 

eligibility criteria (as described in 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
81992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 

Section III.A.2 of this Notice) will move 

on to Expert Review. 

3. Expert Review 

Expert reviewers will assess 

applications based on the Program 

Design criteria. Each application will be 

reviewed by at least three expert 

reviewers. Reviewers will be recruited 

and selected on the basis of 

demonstrated expertise in social 

innovation, scaling and/or replicating 

successful programs, and program 

evaluation. All expert reviewers will be 

screened for conflicts of interest or 

possible impairments to objectivity. 

4. Post Expert Review Quality Control 

(Quality Control) 

Quality Control is designed to ensure 

that every eligible application receives 

full and fair consideration in the review 

process. After the expert reviewers 

complete their assessment, staff will 

review the results to determine whether 

any application should receive a Quality 

Control assessment. This additional 

level of review may be used for 

applications for which there are 

significant anomalies in the results from 

the expert review. Applications 

identified for additional assessment will 

be reviewed by an external Quality 

Control reviewer. The Quality Control 

reviewer provides an assessment of the 

application’s key strengths and 

weaknesses, and compares his or her 

findings to that of the original expert 

reviewers. 

5. Selection of Applications for Internal 

Review 

Upon completing Expert Review, 

Corporation staff will determine which 

applications advance to Internal 

Review. Applications will advance to 

Internal Review based on the results of 

the Expert Review as well as the 

selection criteria specified in section 

198K(h) of the Act, including: 

• Including programs that propose to 

serve significantly philanthropically 

underserved communities: 

• Selecting a geographically diverse 

set of grantees; and 

• Taking into account broad 

community perspectives and support. 

6. Internal Review 

Corporation staff will assess Program 

Design, particularly focusing on: 

Strength of relationships and 

collaborations, opportunity for scale, 

potential to impact public discussion, 

and the rigor of sophistication of 

evidence and evaluation; Organizational 

Capacity; and Cost Effectiveness and 

Budget Adequacy. Following staff 

assessment, some applicants may 

receive requests to provide clarifying 

information. Clarification information is 

used by Corporation staff in making 

final recommendations. A request for 

clarification does not guarantee a grant 

award. Failure to respond to requests for 

information in a timely fashion will 

result in the removal of applications 

from consideration. 

Corporation staff will determine 

which applications to recommend for 

selection based on the results of Expert 

Review, Internal Review, and 

Clarification; and the priorities, 

balancing characteristics, additional 

considerations, and strategic 

characteristics listed above. 

7. Selection 

The final portfolio will be selected 

based on staff recommendation, and 

considering overall quality, priorities, 

balancing characteristics, additional 

considerations, and strategic 

characteristics listed above. 

E. What feedback will applicants 

receive? 

Following grant awards, each 

applicant will receive the results of 

expert and, if applicable, internal 

reviews pertaining to their application. 

VI. Award Administration Information 

A. Award Notices 

CNCS will award cooperative 

agreements following the grant selection 

announcement. CNCS anticipates 

announcing the results of this 

competition by August 2011. The 

government is not obligated to make any 

award as a result of this Notice. 

B. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements 

The Notice of Grant Award (NGA) 

will be subject to and incorporate the 

requirements of section 198K of the 

National and Community Service Act of 

1990, as well as other applicable 

sections of the Act. The NGA will also 

incorporate the approved application 

and budget as part of the binding 

commitments under any award. 

Awardees will be subject to the 

following (as applicable): 

• 2 CFR Part 175—Award term for 

trafficking in persons. 

• 2 CFR Parts 180 and 2200— 

Nonprocurement Debarment and 

Suspension. 

• 2 CFR Part 215 and 45 CFR Part 

2543—Uniform Administrative 

Requirements for Grants and 

Agreements with Institutions of Higher 

Education, Hospitals, and Other NonProfit Organizations (OMB Circular A– 

110). 

• 2 CFR Part 220—Cost Principles for 

Educational Institutions (OMB 

CircularA–21). 

• 2 CFR Part 225—Cost Principles for 

State, Local and Tribal Governments 

(OMB Circular A–87). 

• 2 CFR Part 230—Cost Principles for 

Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular 

A–122). 

• 45 CFR Part 2541—Uniform 

Administrative Requirements for Grants 

and Cooperative Agreements to State 

and Local Governments. 

• 45 CFR Part 2545— 

Governmentwide Requirements for 

Drug-Free Workplace (Financial 

Assistance). 

• 45 CFR Part 2555— 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex 

in Education Programs or Activities 

Receiving Federal Financial Assistance. 

• The Single Audit Act (31 U.S.C. 

Chapter 75) and OMB Circular A–133, 

Audits of States, Local Governments, 

and Non-Profit Organizations (Available 

at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

assets/omb/circulars/a133/a133.pdf). 

C. Use of Materials 

To ensure that materials generated 

with Corporation funding are available 

to the public and readily accessible to 

grantees and sub-grantees, CNCS 

reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, 

and irrevocable right to obtain, use, 

modify, reproduce, publish, or 

disseminate publications and materials 

produced under the award, including 

data, and to authorize others to do so. 

D. Reporting Requirements 

Award recipients for this competition 

must identify the critical outcomes of 

the work, indicators of success in this 

work, and how progress can be judged 

or measured. The recipients will be 

required to report semi-annually on 

agreed upon performance measures. 

Specific guidance on the collection of 

data against these standardized 

measures will be provided upon award. 

CNCS may also require an independent 

assessment of grantee performance. 

In addition, CNCS expects 

intermediaries to hold subgrantees 

accountable for their progress against 

agreed-upon indicators of success. The 

intermediaries will be asked to report 

subgrantee performance information to 

CNCS. 

E. Performance Progress Reports (PPR) 

A semi-annual narrative progress 

report must be submitted using CNCS’s 

Web-based grants management system, 

eGrants, no later than 30 days after the 

close of each reporting period. The 

report will include: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices 81993 

• Budget report for the completed 

budget period. 

• Narrative analysis of the budget 

report, explaining differences between 

budgeted and actual activities and costs 

by funding source. 

• Progress towards performance goals 

and any supporting data and 

methodology. 

• Analysis of sub-application 

progress and performance measures. 

• Discussion of any problems 

observed or experienced and 

recommended solutions. 

F. Federal Financial Reports 

Federal Financial Reports (FFRs) must 

be submitted semi-annually. The reports 

are cumulative and must be submitted 

on CNCS’s Web-based grants 

management system, eGrants, no later 

than 30 days after the close of each 

reporting period. 

G. Final Reports 

In addition to submission of required 

semi-annual reports, the award recipient 

completing an agreement period will be 

required to submit a final report that is 

cumulative over the entire award period 

and consistent with the close-out 

requirements of CNCS’s Office of Grants 

Management. The final report is due 90 

days after the end of the agreement. 

In lieu of the last semi-annual FFR, a 

final FFR must also be submitted. The 

final FFR is due 90 days after the end 

of the agreement. 

H. Other Data-Collection Requirements 

CNCS will require Social Innovation 

Fund grantees to develop final, detailed 

plans for selecting their subgrantees and 

for the evaluation of subgrantees. Final, 

detailed plans will need to be approved 

by CNCS. 

The subgrant selection plan will 

include the following: 

• The estimated number or range of 

subgrant awards that will be made; 

• The estimated range of subgrant 

award amounts; 

• A description of: 

Æ How key subgrant eligibility criteria 

required by this Notice will be 

determined (particularly the level of 

subgrantee evidence); 

Æ The proposed review and selection 

process; and 

Æ Who will review grant applications 

and how the process will ensure 

appropriate conflict of interest policies 

are in place. 

The evaluation plans will address key 

questions, such as the following: 

• What are the specific questions the 

evaluation(s) intends to answer? 

• For grantees proposing an impact 

study, what type of research design (e.g., 

randomized control trial, quasiexperimental) do you hope to conduct? 

Why is this evaluation design 

appropriate for the subgrantees’ stage of 

development, and what useful 

information do you hope to gain? 

• What is the timeline and estimated 

budget for the evaluation? 

• Describe who will conduct the 

evaluations and the process you will 

employ to maintain independence and 

ensure high quality reports. 

Award recipients must also: 

• Identify and document effective 

practices to addressing critical 

community challenges in order to share 

those lessons broadly. 

• Meet as necessary with the 

cognizant program officer, or other staff 

or consultants. 

VI. Agency Contacts 

This Notice is available at http:// 

www.nationalservice.gov/about/ 

serveamerica/innovation.asp. The TTY 

number is 202–606–3472. For further 

information or for a printed copy of this 

Notice, call (202) 606–6745. Or send an 

e-mail to sifapplication@cns.gov. 

VII. Other Information 

A. CNCS will host technical 

assistance calls and/or workshops to 

answer questions from potential 

applicants about this funding 

opportunity, including submitting the 

application through eGrants, CNCS’s 

Web-based application system. 

Applicants are strongly encouraged to 

participate in these sessions. The first 

call will be held on February XXX at 1 

p.m. Eastern Time. Call-in information 

for this technical assistance call and 

additional technical assistance calls will 

be available on CNCS’s Web site at: 

http://www.nationalservice.gov/about/ 

serveamerica/innovation.asp. 

B. For additional information on the 

Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, 

go to: http://www.nationalservice.gov/ 

pdf/09_0331_recovery_summary.pdf. 

C. Public Burden Statement: The 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

requires CNCS to inform all potential 

persons who are to respond to this 

collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. (See 5 CFR 

1320.5(b)(2)(i)). This collection is 

approved under OMB Control #: 3045– 

0129 (CNCS Universal Application, 

Expiration Date: 11/30/2011). 

Dated: December 22, 2010. 

Paul Carttar, 

Director, Social Innovation Fund. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32789 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Transmittal No. 10–62] 

36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification 

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense 

Security Cooperation Agency. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is 

publishing the unclassified text of a 

section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. 

This is published to fulfill the 

requirements of section 155 of Public 

Law 104–164 dated 21 July 1996. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601– 

3740. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

following is a copy of a letter to the 

Speaker of the House of Representatives, 

Transmittal 10–62 with attached 

transmittal, policy justification, and 

Sensitivity of Technology. 

Dated: December 23, 2010. 

Morgan F. Park, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

BILLING CODE 5001–6–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES