### 76772 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

a constitutional presence in the United
States would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously, ’’ I determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, because to do so would render
ineffectual the measures authorized in
the Order.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

Dated: October 18, 2010.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 2010–31001 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4710–10–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF STATE**

**[Public Notice 7260]**

**Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Request for Grant Proposals:**  **Future Leaders Exchange Civic Education Workshop** 

Announcement Type: New Grant. Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/
PE/C/PY–11–16.

Catalog of Federal and Domestic
Assistance Number: 19.415.

Key Dates: Application Deadline: January 4,

2011.

Executive Summary: The Office of Citizen Exchanges, Youth Programs Division, of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs announces an open competition to conduct the Spring Civic Education Workshop for students participating in the academic year Future Leaders Exchange (FLEX) program. The goal of the Spring Workshop is to broaden the participants’ knowledge and understanding of the democratic concepts that are integral to a civil society and to provide them with tools they can take home to aid in the
transformation of their countries. Public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in IRS regulation 26 CFR 1.501(c) may submitproposals to develop and conduct a oneweek workshop in Washington, DC, in Spring 2011. The workshop should include approximately 100 high school
students from 10 Eurasian countries who are attending school in the United States during the 2010/11 academic year. Spring Workshop participants will be selected through an essay contest from among a group of approximately 976 students who are participating in the academic year component of the Division’s Future Leaders Exchange program. Provision of cost sharing to maximize the number of participants will be looked at very favorably.

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Authority: Overall grant making authority for this program is contained
in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87– 256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the

Act is ‘‘to enable the Government of the
United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the
ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the
United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful
relations between the United States and
the other countries of the world. ’’ The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation.

Purpose: The Civic Education Workshop should provide an opportunity for participants to gain a better understanding of the democratic concepts and values that are such an integral part of American society and culture. Concepts such as citizen empowerment, volunteerism, community action, and debate should be included in program components. The program should also enable participants to learn firsthand about the Federal system of government, observe government institutions, hear about and discuss issues on the Federal agenda, and interact with government officials.
Dedicated time blocks should be provided for exposure to and education about the American election process. Special attention also should be paid to those issues that will be especially significant to people from the countries
of the former Soviet Union.

Responsibilities: The recipient of the grant is responsible for developing and conducting the Civic Education Workshop based on guidelines set forth by the Division. The grantee organization will also be responsible for coordinating roundtrip travel arrangements for each participant in the Spring Workshop from his/her host community to Washington, DC, and for providing room and board for students during their time in Washington. The grantee must be amenable to working with the Department of State and the Bureau in arranging certain briefings and visits, as the opportunity arises.

The Spring Workshop should be arranged for seven days, including arrival and departure. The grantee organization will be provided with the
names of the students who will have been chosen for the Spring Workshop after competing in an essay contest. The essays will have been reviewed byindependent, objective, speciallytrained selectors.

Guidelines: The Spring Workshop should be held in early spring 2011 during a time when Congress is in session. Proposals must effectively describe the organization’s ability to accomplish the following essential components of the program:

1. Provide a Civic Education Workshop in Washington, DC, as
described above and held at the time period indicated. Program components
should include sessions on U.S. domestic and foreign policy, the role of the media in a civil society, citizen empowerment, volunteerism and community activism, and federalism.

2. Provide pre-program training for organization staff on the society and
culture of relevant countries before the workshop.

3. Provide housing and meals for all students throughout the Workshop.

4. Arrange roundtrip travel for Spring Workshop students from their U.S. host communities to Washington, DC, in coordination with FLEX placement organizations. ( Note: Students will likely be traveling from most of the 50 states.) Provide ground transportation for students in the DC area, including to and from Washington area airports.

5. Provide opportunities to attend
cultural events and visit museums and

monuments.

6. Coordinate with the Bureau’s Youth Programs Division and the Office of Legislative Affairs in making appropriate arrangements for individual meetings for all Spring Workshop participants with their respective Members of Congress (Senators and/or Representative).

7. Provide staff to assist in case of medical emergencies.

8. Incorporate a component into the Spring Workshop designed to facilitate
students’ transition from the DC program back to their host communities. Include a description of the ways in which all students will be encouraged to share what they have learned, both in
their U.S. host communities and when they return to their home countries.

9. Provide a mechanism for evaluation of the program in terms of its impact on the students and its success in fulfilling the objectives.

A competitive proposal will incorporate important elements of
American culture in sessions that are largely interactive and designed to


### 76773 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

appeal to high school-age students. The Workshop must be substantive and academic while, at the same time, be paced realistically to meet the needs of young people.

Significant cost sharing is important because it will enable a greater number of students to participate. Therefore, those proposals that show more generous and creative cost sharing will be more favorably viewed. Please refer to the Program Objectives, Goals, and Implementation (POGI) section of the Solicitation Package for greater detail regarding the design of component parts as well as other program information.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Grant Agreement.
Fiscal Year Funds: FY 2011. Approximate Total Funding:
$184,000.

Approximate Number of Awards: 1. Anticipated Award Date: Pending availability of funds, February 2011.

Anticipated Project Completion Date: August 31, 2011.

Additional Information: Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA’s intent to renew this grant for two additional fiscal year, before openly competing it again.

III. Eligibility Information

III.1. Eligible Applicants

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

III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds

There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs.

When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the
form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, the grantee organization must maintain written records to support all costs which are claimed as its contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the
value of cash and in-kind contributions
must be in accordance with OMB Circular A–110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event the organization does not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA’s contribution will be reduced in like proportion.

III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements

(a) Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding one grant, in an amount up to $184,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this program. Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. As stated above, the Bureau encourages applicantsto provide maximum levels of costsharing and funding from private sources in support of its programs.

(b) Technical Eligibility: All proposals must comply with the Application and Submission requirements described below or they will result in your proposal being declared technically ineligible and given no further consideration in the review process.

IV. Application and Submission
Information

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

IV.1. Contact Information To Request an Application Package

Please contact the Office of Citizen Exchanges, Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/C/PY), SA–5 Floor 3, U.S. Department of State, 2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, telephone (202) 632–6052; fax (202) 632–9355; e-mail: SchulzAJ@state.gov to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/ C/PY–11–16) located at the top of this announcement when making your
request.

Alternatively, an electronic application package may be obtained from grants.gov. Please see section IV.3f
for further information.

The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction (PSI) document which consists of required application forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document, which provides specific information, award criteria and budget instructions tailored to this competition.

Please specify ECA Program Officer Amy Schulz and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/PE/C/PY–11– 16 on all other inquiries and correspondence.

IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package via Internet

The entire Solicitation Package may
be downloaded from the Bureau’s Web

site at http://exchanges.state.gov/grants/ open2.html, or from the Grants.gov Web

site at http://www.grants.gov.

Please read all information before downloading.

IV.3. Content and Form of Submission

Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The application should be submitted per the instructions under IV.3f.

‘‘Application Deadline and Methods of
Submission ’’ section below.

IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun
and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number,

access http://
www.dunandbradstreet.com or call 1– 866–705–5711. Please ensure that your
DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF–424 which is part of the formal application package.

IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget.

Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) document and the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation (POGI) document for additional formatting and technical requirements.

IV.3c. All Federal award recipients and sub-recipients must maintain current registrations in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database
and have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. Recipients and sub-recipients must maintain accurate and up-to-date
information in the CCR until all program and financial activity and reporting have been completed. All entities must review and update the information at least annually after the initial registration and more frequently if required information changes or another award is granted.

You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. Please


### 76774 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

note: Effective January 7, 2009, all applicants for ECA Federal assistance
awards must include in their application the names of directors and/ or senior executives (current officers, trustees, and key employees, regardless of amount of compensation). In fulfilling this requirement, applicants
must submit information in one of the following ways:

(1) Those who file Internal Revenue
Service Form 990, ‘‘Return of Organization Exempt From Income
Tax, ’’ must include a copy of relevant portions of this form.

(2) Those who do not file IRS Form
990 must submit information above in
the format of their choice.

In addition to final program reporting requirements, award recipients will also be required to submit a one-page document, derived from their program reports, listing and describing their grant activities. For award recipients,
the names of directors and/or senior executives (current officers, trustees,and key employees), as well as the onepage description of grant activities, will be transmitted by the State Department to OMB, along with other information required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), and will be made available to the public by the Office of Management and Budget on its USASpending.gov Web site as part of ECA’s FFATA reporting requirements.

If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status
as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible.

V.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative:

IV.3d.1 Adherence to All Regulations Governing the J Visa

The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the official program sponsor of the exchange program covered by this RFGP, and an employee of the Bureau
will be the ‘‘Responsible Officer’’ for the program under the terms of 22 CFR 62,
which covers the administration of the Exchange Visitor Program (J visa program). Under the terms of 22 CFR 62, organizations receiving grants under this RFGP will be third parties

‘‘ cooperating with or assisting the sponsor in the conduct of the sponsor’s program. ’’ The actions of grantee program organizations shall be ‘‘ imputed to the sponsor in evaluating the sponsor’s compliance with ’’ 22 CFR 62. Therefore, the Bureau expects that any organization receiving a grant under this competition will render all assistance necessary to enable the Bureau to fully comply with 22 CFR 62 et seq.

The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs places critically important emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantee program organizations and program participants to all regulations governing the J visa program status. Therefore, proposals should explicitly state in writing that the applicant is prepared to assist the Bureau in meeting all requirements governing the administration of Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR 62. If your organization has experience as a designated Exchange Visitor Program Sponsor, the applicant should discuss its record of compliance with 22 CFR 62 et. seq., including the oversight of its responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements.

The Office of Citizen Exchanges of ECA will be responsible for issuing DS– 2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor (J) programs is available at http:// exchanges.state.gov or from: Office of Designation, Private Sector Programs Division U.S. Department of State, ECA/ EC/D/PS, SA–5, 5th Floor, 2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037.

IV.3d.2 Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines

Pursuant to the Bureau’s authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social,
and cultural life. ‘‘Diversity’’ should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender,religion, geographic location, socioeconomic status, and physical disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program
content. Please refer to the review
criteria under the ‘‘ Support for Diversity ’’ section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into the total proposal. Public Law 104– 319 provides that ‘‘ in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,
the Bureau ‘‘ shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of
such countries. ’’ Public Law 106—113 requires that the governments of the
countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent
deemed feasible.

IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and
Evaluation

Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project’s success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan
should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge.

Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project’s objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are

‘‘ smart’’ (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will
be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP.

Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between

program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it
cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or
the number of seminars conducted.
Outcomes, in contrast, represent


### 76775 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported,
but the focus should be on outcomes.

We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance):

1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience.

2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding.

3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained;
continued contacts between participants, community members, and
others.

4. Institutional changes, such as
increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements.

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

Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it (1) specifies intended outcomes; (2) gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured; (3) identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and (4) provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome ( i.e. , surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.)

The grantee organization will be required to provide reports analyzing its evaluation findings to the Bureau in its regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be
maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon
request.

IV.3e. Please take the following
information into consideration when preparing your budget:

IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit SF–

424A—‘‘ Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs ’’ along with a comprehensive budget for the entire program. The award may not exceed $184,000. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. Proposals that
maximize the number of students will be favorably viewed. One grant will be awarded for this activity.

Please refer to the Solicitation Package for further details, including a list of allowable costs for the program, complete budget guidelines, and formatting instructions.

IV.3f. Application Deadline and
Methods of Submission

Application Deadline Date: Tuesday, January 4, 2011.

Reference Number: ECA/PE/C/PY–

11–16.

Methods of Submission: Applications may be submitted in one of two ways:

(1.) In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service ( i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc. ), or

(2.) Electronically through http://
www.grants.gov.

Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above
Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF– 424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI)
of the solicitation document.

IV.3f.1—Submitting Printed Applications

Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on
or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for
further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition.
ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant’s responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as
stated above will be considered.

Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF–424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to ‘‘ECA/

EX/PM ’’

.

The original and seven copies of the application should be sent to: Program Management Division, ECA–IIP/EX/PM, Ref.: ECA/PE/C/PY–11–16, SA–5, Floor 4, Department of State, 2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037.

IV.3f.2—Submitting Electronic Applications

Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( http://
www.grants.gov ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in
the ‘‘ Find ’’ portion of the system.

Please follow the instructions available in the ‘Get Started’ portion of the site ( http://www.grants.gov/
GetStarted).

Several of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process could take several weeks. Therefore, applicants should check with appropriate staff within their organizations immediately after reviewing this RFGP to confirm or determine their registration status with Grants.gov.

Once registered, the amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your internet connection. In addition, validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days.

Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.

The Grants.gov Web site includes extensive information on all phases/ aspects of the Grants.gov process, including an extensive section on frequently asked questions, located
under the ‘‘ For Applicants ’’ section of the Web site. ECA strongly recommends that all potential applicants review thoroughly the Grants.gov Web site, well in advance of submitting a proposal through the Grants.gov system. ECA bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes.

Direct all questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission

to: Grants.gov Customer Support, Contact Center Phone: 800–518–4726, Business Hours: Monday–Friday, 7

a.m.–9 p.m. Eastern Time, E-mail: support@grants.gov.


### 76776 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.), Washington, DC time of the closing date to ensure that their entire application has been uploaded to the Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions to the above deadline. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible.

Please refer to the Grants.gov Web site, for definitions of various

‘‘ application statuses ’’ and the difference between a submission receipt and a submission validation. Applicants will
receive a validation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. Again,
validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
ECA will not notify you upon receipt of electronic applications.

It is the responsibility of all applicants submitting proposals via the Grants.gov web portal to ensure that proposals have been received by Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes.

IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications Executive Order 12372 Does Not Apply to This Program.

V. Application Review Information

V.1. Review Process

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

Review Criteria. Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed according to the criteria stated
below. These criteria are not rank ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation:

1. Quality of the Program Idea: Proposals should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to the Bureau’s mission, as well as the objectives of the FLEX program. Program design must reflect an understanding of young people and of cultural traits that would be specific to this population.

2. Program Planning: Detailed agenda and relevant work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and logistical capacity. Agenda and plan should adhere to the program overview and guidelines described above.

3. Ability to Achieve Program Objectives: Objectives should be reasonable, feasible, and flexible. Proposals should clearly demonstrate
how the institution will meet the program’s objectives and plan.

4. Multiplier Effect/Impact: Proposed programs should describe the impact that workshop participants will have on others, both in their U.S. host communities and in their respective Eurasian country after they return home. There should be a plan for providing students with tools they can take back
to their Eurasian home countries to implement concepts and ideas they have gained from the workshop. Proposals also should explain how academic year students will be prepared
to transition back to their host

communities.

5. Support of Diversity: Proposals should demonstrate substantive support of the Bureau’s policy on diversity.
Achievable and relevant features should be cited in both program administration (program venue and program evaluation) and program content (topics of program sessions and meetings, resource materials and follow-up activities).

6. Institutional Capacity/Record: Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the program or project’s goals. Proposals should
demonstrate an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past Bureau grants as determined by Bureau
Grant Staff. The Bureau will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants.

7. Project Evaluation: Proposals should include a plan to evaluate the activity’s success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. A draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives is recommended. The successful applicant will be expected to submit a final report.

8. Cost-Effectiveness/Cost-Sharing:
The overhead and administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and appropriate. Proposals should maximize cost-sharing through other private sector support as well as institutional direct funding
contributions.

VI. Award Administration Information

VI.1. Award Notices

Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Federal Assistance Award (FAA) from
the Bureau’s Grants Office. The FAA and the original proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the
U.S. Government. The FAA will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient’s responsible officer identified in the application.

Unsuccessful applicants will receive
notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition.

VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

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

Circular A–122, ‘‘ Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations. ’’ Office of Management and Budget

Circular A–21, ‘‘ Cost Principles for
Educational Institutions. ’’ OMB Circular A–87, ‘‘ Cost Principles for

State, Local and Indian Governments ’’

. OMB Circular No. A–110 (Revised),

Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A–102, Uniform

Administrative Requirements for
Grants-in-Aid to State and Local

Governments. OMB Circular No. A–133, Audits of

States, Local Government, and Nonprofit Organizations.
Please reference the following
websites for additional information:


### 76777 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants. http://fa.statebuy.state.gov.

VI.3. Reporting Requirements

You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the following reports:

(1.) A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award;

(2.) A concise, one-page final program report summarizing program outcomes no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award. This one-page report will be transmitted to OMB, and be made available to the public via

OMB’s USAspending.gov Web site—as part of ECA’s Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reporting requirements.

(3.) A SF–PPR, ‘‘Performance Progress Report’’ Cover Sheet with all program
reports.

(4.) The SF–PPR–E and SF–PPR–F with the Final Performance Report.

Award recipients will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.

All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must
be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon
request.

All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer
listed in the final assistance award
document.

VII. Agency Contacts

For questions about this announcement, contact: Amy Schulz, U.S. Department of State, Office of Citizen Exchanges/Youth Programs Division, ECA/PE/C/PY/F, SA–5, 3rd Floor, ECA/PE/C/PY–11–16, 2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, Telephone (202) 632–6052, Fax (202) 632–9355, e-mail SchulzAJ@state.gov.

All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference
the above title and number ECA/PE/C/

PY–11–16.

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

VIII. Other Information

Notice: The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding.

Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3

above.

Dated: December 2, 2010.

Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2010–30872 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4710–05–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**Public Notice for a Change in Use of Aeronautical Property at Houlton**  **International Airport, Houlton, Maine**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Request for Public Comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA is requesting public comment on the Town of Houlton, Maine’s request to change a portion (36,450 s.f.) of Airport property from
aeronautical use to non-aeronautical use. The property is located on Industrial Drive adjacent to Houlton International Corporation. The property will be used to expand Houlton international Corporation’s facility. The property was acquired from the United States Government under Surplus Property Deed dated July 14, 1947.

The disposition of proceeds from the disposal of airport property will be in accordance with FAA’s Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February 16, 1999.

Section 125 of The Wendell H. Ford
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21St Century (AIR 21) requires the FM to provide an opportunity for public
notice and comment to the ‘‘waiver’’ or

‘‘ modification ’’ of a sponsor’s Federal obligation to use certain airport property for aeronautical purposes.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before January 10, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Documents are available for review by appointment by contacting Mr. Douglas Hazlett, Town Manager, Telephone 207–532–7111 or by contacting Donna R. Witte, Federal Aviation Administration, 16 New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts, Telephone 781–238–

7624. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Donna R. Witte at the Federal Aviation Administration, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803, Telephone 781–

238–7624.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The following is a legal description of the property located in the Town of Houlton, County of Aroostook, State of Maine as shown on a land survey prepared by Swallow Associates

entitled ‘‘ Survey of Land for Shiretown Development Corp. Being Land at Houlton International Airport, Houlton,

Maine ’’ Said parcel is more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southwesterly corner of the land conveyed to the Shiretown Development Corporation by the Town of Houlton in a deed dated October 22, 2004, and recorded in Book 4057, Page 286 in the Southern Aroostook Registry of Deeds; thence northerly on the west line of said Shiretown Development Corporation parcel on a course bearing North nine degrees fifty-three minutes forty-three seconds East (N 09 53 ′ 43 ′′ E)

for a distance of six hundred and zerohundredths (600.00) feet to a 1 ⁄ 2 ′′ pin

found at the northwest corner of said Shiretown Development Corporation parcel; thence westerly on an extension

of the north line of said Shiretown Development Corporation parcel on a course bearing North eighty degrees six minutes seventeen seconds West (N 80

06 ′ 17 ′′ W) for a distance of sixty and ninety-hundredths (60.90) feet to a point; thence southerly on a course bearing South nine degrees fifty-three minutes forty-three seconds East (S 09

53 ′ 43 ′′ E) for a distance of six hundred and zero hundredths (600.00) feet to a point; thence easterly on a course bearing South eighty degrees six minutes seventeen seconds East (S 80

06 ′ 17 ′′ E) for a distance of sixty and ninety hundredths (60.90) feet to the point of beginning.

The basis of bearings for this description is magnetic from compass observation of February 4, 2008.

The above described parcel contains 36,450 square feet.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
November 19, 2010.

Bill Watson,

Acting Manager, Airports Division, New England Region.

[FR Doc. 2010–30619 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–M**