# Sri Lanka - United States Department of State

- Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Lu’s Travel to India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh Office of the SpokespersonAssistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu will travel to India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh May 10—15. His trip will strengthen bilateral cooperation with each country and demonstrate U.S. support for a free, open, and prosperous Indo-Pacific region.In Chennai, Assistant Secretary Lu will meet with Consulate personnel to bolster bilateral engagement in southern India.He will then travel to Colombo to engage with officials from across the political spectrum and deepen the United States’ partnership with Sri Lanka. In his meetings, he will reaffirm the United States’ support for Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, as well as the importance of a robust civil society as a cornerstone of a free and democratic society.Assistant Secretary Lu will conclude his trip in Dhaka, where he will meet with government officials, civil society leaders, and other Bangladeshis to discuss U.S.-Bangladesh cooperation, including on addressing the climate crisis and deepening economic ties.
- Sri Lanka HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Sri Lanka				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Sri Lanka																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																								Freedom of Association																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																											f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Indigenous Peoples																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				During the year, the government of Sri Lanka released on bail dozens of suspects held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Police also issued new guidelines to respect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons and stop arrest and harassment of transgender persons. In March the government indefinitely postponed local government elections, citing a lack of funds, and the terms of local councils across the country expired.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings; torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; transnational repression against individuals in another country; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including violence and threats of violence against journalists, unjustified arrests of journalists, and censorship; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental organizations and civil society organizations; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections; serious government corruption; serious government restrictions on or harassment of domestic and international human rights organizations; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic and intimate partner violence and sexual violence; crimes involving violence targeting Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and Tamils; laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, even if the laws were not enforced; and crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons.The government took minimal steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were several reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year. There were multiple deaths in police custody, with many incidents following a similar pattern. Many deaths occurred when police took suspects to the alleged crime scene as part of an investigation or claimed that suspects attacked them during interrogation or tried to escape.For example, on January 10, police arrested A.G. Samantha Preethi Kumara, assistant manager of the National Vocational Training Institute, for alleged possession of 15 grams of heroin. According to police, he acted impulsively while being interrogated and injured a police officer with a broken glass bottle. After the altercation, Kumara was pronounced dead. The autopsy reported the cause of death as internal bleeding. Seven individuals, including a subinspector of the Police Narcotics Bureau, were arrested and, as of the end of October, remained in pretrial detention.On March 8, Ajith Kumara, sentenced to nine months in prison for failure to pay money in a maintenance case, was shot and killed by a prison guard when he allegedly attempted to escape from Kegalle Prison. As of the end of October, a police investigation continued.The Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) reported as of July it received at least seven reports of extrajudicial killings and eight cases of deaths in custody. Police were responsible for investigating allegations of unlawful killings by security forces and the Attorney General’s Department was responsible for filing indictments and prosecuting cases. In February the President’s Office told the Supreme Court that President Wickremesinghe would not authorize the use of capital punishment. According to civil society, this was the first time a president gave written assurance to a court that death sentences would not be implemented.In 2022, police opened fire at a protest against a fuel price hike in Rambukkana, killing one civilian, Chaminda Lakshan, and injuring 24 others. Ten days later, police arrested Senior Superintendent of Police K.B. Keerthiratne, accused of giving the order to shoot, and three officers who were involved in the incident. Police claimed that the deceased victim had attempted to set fire to a tanker carrying fuel and that police used live ammunition only after attempting to disperse the protest with tear gas. Three months later, the Kegalle High Court granted bail to Keerthiratne and the other arrested police officers. The HRCSL investigated the incident and found that police had used excessive force and recommended a disciplinary inquiry against Keerthiratne. In April the HRCSL presented its final recommendations to police, which included paying compensation to the family of the victim. As of the end of October, the criminal case continued against Keerthiratne.On February 3, the Supreme Court ordered the inspector general of police to develop and implement guidelines to prevent “encounter deaths” in police custody. As of the end of October, police were still working with the Attorney General’s Department to issue the final policy.Police reported a surge in shootings across the island with a total of 70 cases as of the end of August causing 41 fatalities and 30 injuries, committed by members of organized crime syndicates. In 2022, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) arrested former Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) parliamentarian Duminda Silva after the Supreme Court temporarily suspended his June 2021 pardon. Silva was sentenced to death in 2016 for the 2011 killing of fellow SLFP parliamentarian Bharatha Lakshman Premachandra during local elections but was pardoned in 2021 by then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Civil and political leaders called the move historic and said it might set a precedent in other petitions against recent presidential pardons that promoted impunity. As of the end of October, the Supreme Court review of the challenges to the pardon of Silva remained pending.On January 12, the Supreme Court ruled former President Maithripala Sirisena had violated the fundamental rights of victims of the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks and ordered him to pay 100 million rupees ($310,000) as damages. The Supreme Court also ordered former Inspector General of Police Pujith Jayasundara and former State Intelligence Service Director Nilantha Jayawardhane to pay 75 million rupees ($232,000) each, former Defense Secretary Hemasiri Fernando to pay 50 million rupees ($155,000), and former Chief of National Intelligence Sisira Mendis to pay 10 million rupees ($31,000) as damages to the victims. The court held that Sirisena, who was also defense minister, had not convened regular meetings of the National Security Council and had omitted key personnel from the meetings he held. On July 11, Sirisena sought additional time from the Supreme Court to pay the remaining 85 million rupees ($264,000). As of the end of October, the case remained pending.There was little progress during the year in the cases of 25 individuals charged with perpetrating the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks. In response to the September 5 broadcast of a documentary by the United Kingdom’s Channel 4 alleging the involvement and complicity of senior government officials in in the Easter bombings, President Wickremesinghe announced on September 10 he would appoint an investigative committee to be chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities. The Office on Missing Persons (OMP) reported that as of the end of October it had not received any new complaints of missing persons or enforced disappearances.There was little progress investigating allegations of abuses from the 1983-2009 civil war or from the 1988-89 Marxist insurrection in the south. Impunity and lack of accountability for war-era abuses remained a problem. Disappearances during the war and its aftermath remained unresolved. Families of disappeared and missing persons remained frustrated with the lack of progress investigating cases and the lack of answers from the government or OMP.In 2022, the cabinet approved the appointment of 25 boards of inquiry to expedite OMP investigations into 14,988 complaints of enforced disappearances and missing persons. As of September 5, the OMP had appointed 16 boards of inquiry, which had met with approximately 3,559 complainants. During the year, the OMP established tracing, protection, and victim and family supporting units to assist victims, families, and witnesses. At the OMP’s request, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka recirculated guidelines to financial institutions on recognizing Certificates of Absence (CoA) as legal documents. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as of July, 1,313 families had obtained certificates of absence. The OMP also conducted a needs assessment in line with its Strategic Road Map. In a September report to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights stated the OMP required “proactive, independent leadership and more robust investigative and tracing capacities.” As of July, the government reported it had paid 40.6 million rupees ($126,000) as relief to 203 families of persons from the north and east missing from the civil war.On July 11, Foreign Minister Ali Sabry briefed civil society on government plans to pass a Truth and Reconciliation Commission bill, including the establishment of a judicial mechanism to investigate human rights abuses from the end of the civil war. In August the government established an Interim Secretariat for a Truth and Reconciliation Mechanism, appointed a director general, and established Legal and Policy, Public Relations, and Information Technology divisions. Civil society groups criticized the government for moving forward with the secretariat without extensive consultations, and for not implementing recommendations from previous post conflict commissions, including the 2016 Consultation Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms. In August the government extended until September 15, then again until the end of October, the Special Commission of Inquiry, appointed in 2021, to examine the findings of previous commissions and committees on human rights and reconciliation.There were 14 reported mass graves in the country pending investigation, most in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. The OMP was legally empowered to act as an observer during excavations, exhumations, and other proceedings related to suspected grave sites. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported the OMP legal counsel assisted with the excavation of mass graves in Mannar and Mullaitivu.In 2022, a court ruled that attorneys could represent families of disappeared persons in the case of the mass grave found in Mannar in 2018. The court also ordered the OMP to intervene in and expedite the case and ruled lawyers, press, and representatives of the families of the disappeared could monitor the excavation process. In September the local nongovernmental organization (NGO) Center for Human Rights and Development reported the investigation into the Mannar mass grave continued, and the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology was undertaking bone analysis of more than 50 samples from the mass grave.On June 29, construction workers found a suspected mass grave in Kokkuthoduvai, Mullaitivu District, and during exhumation in July, a judicial medical officer found the remains of 13 bodies believed to be Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) soldiers, along with military-style uniforms. The Ministry of Justice allocated 5.6 million rupees ($17,350) for the exhumation process, and the Mullaitivu Magistrate Court approved a Standard Operating Procedure – developed by the OMP – to be followed during the exhumation. The exhumation began on September 5. Families of the disappeared, civil society, local politicians, and the press observed excavation following a court ruling allowing their presence. Civil society and the OMP reported government intelligence officers were also present and questioned some of the observers. The OMP stated some intelligence officers entered the mass grave without authorization and eroded public trust in the exhumation process.There was no progress during the year in high-profile disappearance cases.There was no progress on the “Navy 11” case of the abduction and disappearance of 11 individuals from Colombo in 2008 and 2009 involving former navy Commander Wasantha Karannagoda. In May President Ranil Wickremesinghe removed Karannagoda as governor of the North Western Province, reportedly for reasons unrelated to allegations of human rights violations.On January 24, the Supreme Court sentenced retired army officer Major Ajith Prasanna to four years of rigorous imprisonment and fined him for a contempt of court and witness intimidation case. The case had been filed in 2019 after Prasanna held a media briefing that reportedly intimidated witnesses in the Navy 11 case. A different contempt of court case was filed in 2020 after Prasanna criticized the judiciary during an interview. On June 8, the Court of Appeal sentenced Prasanna to six months in prison after he pled guilty to contempt of court.On September 5, the Permanent Trial-at-Bar postponed until November 23 a hearing in the case of the 2010 enforced disappearance and presumed murder of cartoonist Prageeth Ekneligoda. Two of the three judges presiding over the case withdrew due to other commitments and were not replaced. The judge also postponed an order to include additional evidence that would support the prosecution’s case alleging military involvement in the disappearance. The suspects had been charged in 2019 but were released on bail shortly thereafter.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution and law prohibited such practices, but there were credible reports that government officials employed them. The law made torture a punishable offense and mandated a sentence of not less than seven years’ and not more than 10 years’ imprisonment. The government maintained a Committee on the Prevention of Torture to visit sites of allegations, examine evidence, and take preventive measures on allegations of torture. The Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) allowed courts to admit as evidence any statements made by the accused at any time and provided no exception for confessions extracted by torture. In 2022, parliament amended the PTA to include judicial oversight to safeguard against torture but did not remove the clause allowing for the use of confessions made to police while in police custody. Human rights and civil society organizations alleged that torture and excessive use of force by police, particularly to extract confessions, remained endemic. The HRCSL, for example, noted that many reports of torture referred to police allegedly “roughing up” suspects to extract a confession or otherwise elicit evidence. As in previous years, arrestees reported torture and mistreatment, forced confessions, and denial of basic rights, such as access to lawyers or family members. Anecdotally, male arrestees more often reported facing torture than female arrestees.On August 16, the National Police Commission issued new procedures to record and investigate complaints against police officers. The procedures outlined the commission’s authority to appoint independent investigations into complaints and the inspector general of police’s obligation to hold police officers and stations accountable to respond in a timely manner to investigations. The procedures also required that all complainants be informed of the outcome of any investigation into their complaint. From January 2022 to August 2023, the HRCSL documented 560 complaints of torture. In response to allegations of torture, the HRCSL carried out routine visits to detention centers and established a Rapid Response Unit to conduct immediate visits and inquiries.Impunity remained a significant problem characterized by a lack of accountability for abuses, particularly regarding government officials, military, paramilitary, police, and other security-sector officials. Civil society organizations asserted the government, including the courts, was reluctant to act against security forces alleged to be responsible for abuses. During the year, civil society organizations reported some Tamils from the north alleged police illegally detained and tortured them and questioned them regarding connections to the LTTE or participation in protests.On November 8, Vaddukkottai police arrested Nagarasa Alex, age 25, for allegedly committing theft. Alex subsequently received hospital treatment on November 16 for injuries sustained from alleged police torture. A widely circulated video showed Alex describing the alleged police torture during a hospital interview. On November 19, police returned Alex to the Jaffna Teaching Hospital, where hospital staff later pronounced him dead. A postmortem examination reported Alex sustained multiple injuries including abrasions and contusions on his upper and lower limbs. On November 24, four police officers were arrested for alleged involvement in Alex’s death. As of December, they remained in pretrial detention while an investigation continued.On June 9, the Ministry of Justice publicly released its report on parliamentarian and State Minister Lohan Ratwatte’s 2021 forceful entry into two prisons where he threatened Tamil detainees at gunpoint. The report made six recommendations, including to file attempted murder charges against Ratwatte, who was the state minister of prisons at the time of the incident. A police spokesperson told the press on June 15 police would not initiate any action against Ratwatte without direction from the Cabinet of Ministers. In September the Attorney General’s Department stated it would charge Ratwatte for criminal intimidation. As of September 15, Ratwatte was on bail with the first hearing scheduled for January 2024.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison conditions were poor due to overcrowding, a shortage of sanitary facilities, and old infrastructure.Abusive Physical Conditions: Overcrowding was a problem. According to the prisons’ spokesperson, there was a rise in the number of incarcerations during the year, increasing congestion within prisons. As of the end of August, 28,551 prisoners and suspects including 1,065 women were detained in a system with a capacity for 13,241. Prison cells meant for one prisoner were often occupied by three or four, at times resulting in inmates lacking sleeping space and adequate sanitary conditions.On January 18, parliament passed the Bureau of Rehabilitation bill establishing a government agency to oversee mandated drug rehabilitation programs and requiring the government to build new treatment facilities. As of the end of October, the government had not implemented the new legislation.Administration: The HRCSL, on its own initiative or after a complaint was reported, investigated complaints and referred them to the relevant authorities when warranted.Independent Monitoring: The Board of Prison Visitors was the primary domestic organization conducting visits to prisoners and accepting complaints; it also had the legal mandate to examine overall conditions of detention. The Board of Prison Visitors functioned as an internal governmental watchdog and was established under the Prisons Ordinance. Its members were representatives of civil society who were otherwise unaffiliated with the government or other state institutions. The HRCSL had a mandate to monitor prison conditions, and police largely respected its recommendations. The HRCSL and the government permitted independent nongovernmental organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross access to all prisoners and detainees, regardless of the type of facility.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any persons to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court. The government generally did not observe these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						The criminal procedure code allowed police to make an arrest without a warrant for offenses such as homicide, theft, robbery, and rape. Alternatively, police might make arrests pursuant to arrest warrants judges and magistrates issued based on evidence. The law required authorities to inform an arrested person of the reason for the arrest and arraign that person before a magistrate within 24 hours for minor crimes, 48 hours for some grave crimes, and 72 hours for crimes covered by the PTA. Suspects accused of committing bailable offenses were entitled to bail, administered by police, before seeing a magistrate. For suspects accused of nonbailable offenses, bail was granted only after appearing before a magistrate and at the magistrate’s discretion.The Bail Act stated no person should be held in custody for more than 12 months prior to conviction and sentencing without a special exemption. If a trial had not commenced within 12 months of indictment under the PTA, the High Court might authorize bail. Otherwise, judges required approval from the attorney general to authorize bail for persons detained under the PTA. The Attorney General’s Department provided such approval in some cases. In homicide cases, regulations required the magistrate to detain the suspect, and only the High Court could grant bail.In all cases, suspects had the right to legal representation, although no provision specifically provided the right of a suspect to legal representation during interrogations in police stations and detention centers. The government provided counsel for indigent defendants in criminal cases before the High Court and Court of Appeal but not in other cases; the law required the provision of counsel only for cases heard at the High Court and Court of Appeal.Arbitrary Arrest: The HRCSL received numerous complaints of arbitrary arrest and detention. Police sometimes held detainees incommunicado, and lawyers had to apply for permission to meet clients, with police frequently present at such meetings. In some cases, unlawful detentions reportedly included interrogations involving mistreatment or torture. In August the government stated a de facto moratorium on the use of the PTA had been in effect since March 2022. Despite this there were reports of at least 15 arrests under the PTA. This included nine Tamils arrested in November for alleged use of illegal symbols or images glorifying the LTTE during participation in LTTE Great Heroes Day, an annual event to commemorate fallen LTTE fighters.On May 18, the police CID arrested four Muslims under the PTA, all of whom were associated with al-Zuhriya Arabic College and were witnesses in support of Muslim human rights attorney Hejaaz Hizbullah, who spent nearly 22 months detained under the PTA in connection with the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings before receiving bail in 2022. All four witnesses originally recorded statements when Hizbullah was arrested in 2020, but police had not previously pursued steps against them. On June 26, Puttalam High Court indicted two suspects under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act, released them on bail, and dropped all charges against the other two.On January 31, the government dropped all PTA charges against Inter-University Students’ Federation Convener Wasantha Mudalige in cases related to the 2022 antigovernment protests. On February 1, the court released Mudalige on bail on three different cases related to his convening or participating in protests. Mudalige had been in custody since August 2022 under the PTA.According to civil society sources, from January 1 to the end of October at least 60 PTA detainees, including convicted prisoners, were released by court on bail, had charges against them dropped, or were acquitted. On August 9, President Wickremesinghe told parliament that under the PTA there were 21 prisoners in pretrial detention, three convicted with death sentences, and 22 others convicted, serving sentences. He approved the release of 11 of the convicted prisoners. As of August 9, civil society groups estimated that those who remained incarcerated under the PTA consisted of 46 convicted and pretrial detention PTA prisoners, including Tamils for offenses related to the LTTE and Muslims in relation to the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks.In 2020 and 2021, the government arrested five prominent Muslims, Rishad Bathiudeen, Riyaj Bathiudeen, Azath Salley, Ahnaf Jazeem, and Hejaaz Hizbullah, for alleged involvement in the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings and indicted three of them on speech-related offenses under the PTA. Advocates on behalf of these individuals claimed the government had been unable to produce credible evidence of their alleged connections to terrorist activity and filed fundamental rights petitions at the Supreme Court to free them, although proceedings were delayed for months. By the end of 2021, three were released on bail and one was acquitted, and the last prominent Muslim, Hejaaz Hizbullah, was released in February 2022. As of the end of December, only Hejaaz Hizbullah’s case remained pending as the High Court acquitted two individuals in 2022 and Muslim poet Ahnaf Jazeem on December 12.Pretrial Detention: Pretrial detainees comprised approximately two-thirds of the detainee population. Inability to post bail, lengthy legal procedures, judicial inefficiency, and corruption often caused delays in releasing pretrial detainees. Legal advocacy groups asserted that for those cases in which pretrial detention exceeded 24 hours, it was common for the length of pretrial detention to equal or exceed the sentence for the alleged crime.A person could legally challenge an arrest or detention and obtain release through the courts. The legal process took years, however, and the Center for Human Rights Development reported the perceived lack of judicial independence and minimal compensation discouraged individuals from challenging an arrest or detention in the courts. Individuals detained under the PTA had the right to challenge their detention, but many such individuals faced difficulties in accessing this right due to administrative restrictions on access to lawyers and lack of financial resources to retain competent counsel.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The law provided for an independent judiciary, but the government sometimes did not respect judicial independence and impartiality. In 2022, parliament passed an amendment to the constitution that removed the president’s sole discretion for appointing judges of superior courts and reestablished a constitutional council to play a role in nominations and approvals of presidential appointments to oversight commissions, the superior courts, and key executive branch appointments.																Trial Procedures						The constitution and law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.A shortage of court-appointed interpreters limited the right of Tamil-speaking defendants to free interpretation as necessary. In several instances, courts tried criminal cases with Tamil-speaking defendants in Sinhala-speaking areas, which exacerbated the language difference and increased the difficulty of travel for witnesses. Few legal textbooks were available in Tamil.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						Some Tamil and Muslim politicians, international organizations, and local human rights activists referred to PTA detainees including former Tamil-LTTE combatants, Muslims, and student activists accused of terrorism-related violent crimes as political prisoners, alleging they were held for their speech, advocacy, or criticism of the government. The government charged the prisoners in question had committed or conspired to commit terrorist or violent criminal acts. The government permitted access to prisoners on a regular basis by the HRCSL, magistrates, and the Board of Prison Visits. Authorities granted irregular access to those providing legal counsel and reportedly monitored prisoners’ visits with counsel.																										f. Transnational Repression										The government engaged in transnational repression against Tamil and Muslim diaspora organizations as well as certain individuals, primarily Muslims, living abroad.Threats, Harassment, Surveillance, and Coercion: In June the Ministry of Defense renewed the proscription of nine Tamil diaspora organizations for allegedly supporting and funding terrorism, allegations which the organizations continued to deny. It also renewed the proscription of dozens of individuals, primarily Muslims, including those living overseas. On June 10, the secretary of the Ministry of Defense froze all funds, other financial assets, and economic resources belonging to or held by any designated person or group. On July 26, the government removed a ban on five of the 11 Muslim groups that were proscribed in 2021 under the PTA. The delisted organizations were United Thawheed Jamma’ath, Ceylon Thawheed Jamma’ath, Sri Lanka Thawheed Jamma’ath, All Ceylon Thawheed Jamma’ath and Jamiyathul Ansari Sunnathul Mohomadiya.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Land ownership disputes continued between private individuals in former war zones, and between citizens and the government.The military seized significant amounts of land during the 1983-2009 civil war to create security buffer zones around military bases and other high-value targets, known as high security zones (HSZs). During and immediately following the war, government officials frequently posted acquisition notices for HSZ lands that were inaccessible to property owners, many of whom initiated court cases, including fundamental right cases before the Supreme Court, to challenge these acquisitions. Throughout the year, lawsuits, including a 2016 Supreme Court fundamental right case and numerous writ applications filed with courts, remained stalled. Although HSZs had no legal framework following the lapse of emergency regulations in 2011, they still existed and remained off limits to civilians.With the amount of seized and inaccessible land remaining in dispute, many of those affected by the HSZs complained that the pace at which the government demilitarized land was too slow, that the military held lands it viewed as economically valuable for military benefit, and that military possession of land denied livelihood to the local population. According to the acquisition notices, while most of the land acquired was for use as army camps and bases, among the purposes listed on certain notices were the establishment of a hotel, a factory, and a farm. Some Hindu and Muslim groups reported they had difficulty officially claiming land they had long inhabited if Buddhist monks placed a statue of Buddha or a bodhi tree on their property, and they described these acts as part of a “colonialization” plan to dilute the concentration of minorities in the north.According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the government returned 90 to 92 percent of the land occupied by security forces and police in 2009; the government stated this comprised 817 acres of state and 22,101 acres of private land. Security forces and police continued to occupy 3,754 acres of land, including 862 state and 2,892 acres of private land, the ministry reported.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The PTA permitted government authorities to enter homes and monitor communications without judicial or other authorization. Government authorities reportedly monitored private movements without authorization. During the year, civil society and journalists reported several allegations of both online and offline surveillance and said the government targeted ethnic minorities engaged in work related to postwar reconciliation or transitional justice.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, but the government sometimes restricted this right.Freedom of Expression: Authorities restricted hate speech, including insults to religion or religious beliefs, through a police ordinance and the penal code. The government requested media stations and outlets refrain from featuring hate speech in their news items and segments. Restrictions on hate speech were applied selectively, with hate speech against Muslims more tolerated than against other groups. There were also reports that authorities attempted to intimidate individuals who criticized the government, including through public statements, questioning by security officials, official visits at their homes, and arrests. Civil society accused the government of using the ICCPR and penal code provisions against hate speech to curtail freedom of expression. In its September report to the UNHRC, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) also reported the government misused the ICCPR to stifle freedom of expression.On January 6, the CID arrested social media personality Sepal Amarasinghe for making insulting remarks regarding the Buddhist Temple of the Tooth Relic. He was held in pretrial detention until February 21, when a court dropped the case against him.On May 28, police arrested stand-up comedian Nathasha Edirisooriya on charges of insulting Buddhism during an April performance, a recording of which was posted to the SLVlog YouTube channel on May 23. Police accused her of violating section 3(1) of the ICCPR Act, which criminalized advocacy of “national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence” as well as the Computer Crime Act and hate speech provisions of the penal code. Police arrested the administrator of SLVlog, Bruno Divakara, on May 31 under the same provisions of the ICCPR Act, penal code, and Computer Crime Act for propagating Edirisooriya’s remarks. The magistrate in both cases initially ordered the detainees to remain in pretrial detention. On July 6, the Colombo Fort magistrate granted bail to Edirisooriya. Civil society criticized the arrest as stifling freedom of speech in the guise of protecting religious harmony. As of the end of October, the charges against Edirisooriya remained pending.Evangelical Christian pastor Jerome Fernando went overseas in May to evade an arrest warrant for April 30 statements deemed offensive to Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism. Many, including the Catholic Church and politicians across parties, condemned Fernando’s remarks. As of September, the arrest warrant remained pending, and Fernando remained overseas.Violence and Harassment: There were reports of harassment and intimidation of journalists covering sensitive topics. Some journalists including citizen journalists, reported harassment, threats, intimidation, and interference from members of state security services, especially when reporting on topics related to the civil war or its aftermath, including missing persons. Tamil journalists reported military officers requested copies of photographs, lists of attendees at events, and names of sources for articles. They also reported the military directly requested that journalists refrain from reporting on sensitive events, such as Tamil war commemorations or land occupation protests, as well as on posting anything related to former LTTE leaders, and that they feared repercussions if they did not cooperate.Reporters alleged that authorities, sometimes in government vehicles, surveilled journalists, especially those covering protests.On July 28, police arrested Young Journalists’ Association member Tharindu Uduwaragedara for being part of an illegal gathering and criminal coercion of a government official while he was covering a labor union protest. The arrest sparked outcry on social media after videos showed police pulling Uduwaragedara by his hair and further assaulting him, resulting in injury to his head and arms. He was granted bail on July 29 and subsequently admitted to the hospital on the orders of a judicial medical officer. Uduwaragedara was discharged from the hospital on July 31.On August 22, a Sinhalese mob led by a Buddhist monk surrounded vehicles with three journalists – Selvakumar Nilanthan, Valasingham Krishnakumar, and Antony Christopher Christiraj – and a group of interfaith religious leaders after the journalists reported on alleged encroachments on Tamil cattle farmers’ land in Batticaloa District. The mob, some reportedly armed with knives, held the journalists and a group of approximately 15 others for more than two hours despite the presence of officials from the local government development authority. The interfaith group leaders called police, who arrived hours later after Tamil politicians raised the matter in parliament. As of the end of October, police had not opened an investigation into the incident.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: Some journalists said the Attorney General’s Department ignored requests for comments but threatened journalists with slander lawsuits when the journalists reported on large-scale corruption cases without comment from the government. Nevertheless, slander was not a criminal offense in the country.While some online commentators reported occasionally self-censoring because of fears of harassment, threats, and intimidation, more journalists seemed concerned with whether antigovernment reporting might be rejected by publishers who feared losing advertising revenue controlled by the government. Those who worked for smaller media organizations reported increased self-censorship due to fear they would face heightened vulnerability, as they had no institutional backing.On July 20, the Ministry of Health reissued a blanket ban on public health staff making statements or expressing their views on the sector, citing a Supreme Court ruling that state employees had no right to make comments to the press without prior approval from their departmental head. After the Health Professionals Association threatened to protest, the secretary of the ministry said the ban would not apply to the union but would apply to other health-sector employees. The ban came after several articles and public statements by health employees concerning a declining standard of imported medicine following a number of deaths and serious illnesses reported in state hospitals.National Security: Authorities continued to cite the PTA, ICCPR Act, and penal code to arrest and punish critics of the government and deter criticism of government policies or officials.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content. There were credible reports that the government monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The government restricted freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The law provided for freedom of peaceful assembly, but these freedoms were subject to multiple restrictions. The constitution restricted the freedom of assembly in the interest of religious harmony, national security, public order, or the protection of public health or morality. Freedom of peaceful assembly also might be restricted in the interest of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others or in the interest of meeting the just requirements of the general welfare of a democratic society. Under a police ordinance, protesters were required to seek permission from local police before holding a protest.On January 18, the Jaffna Magistrate Court arrested prominent Tamil civil society activist and coordinator of the 2021 Pottuvil-to-Poligandy protest movement, Hindu priest Velan Swamigal, for allegedly obstructing police duties during a January 15 protest against President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s visit to Jaffna. Swamigal was released on bail later that day.On March 7, police teargassed and arrested several Inter University Student Federation protesters in front of Colombo University. Video of school children affected by the tear gas as they left a nearby school went viral on social media, causing many online commenters to condemn the government. On March 8, police again used tear gas and arrested six Kelaniya University students who were protesting the previous day’s arrests. Later on March 8, police issued an apology to the administration of Colombo University for firing tear gas into its premises, press reported. Local NGO Centre for Society and Religion in a report stated police often used expired tear gas, including during the 2022 Aragalaya protest movement, and did not receive proper training on the use of tear gas. Police denied these allegations.The government allowed May 18 commemorations, a day when Tamils typically memorialize those killed in the final stages of the civil war. On May 18, events proceeded in the North and East Provinces, without major incident, and according to activists, marked a change from previous administrations’ attempts to restrict or interfere with Tamil commemorations. When a group of Tamils and southern civil society held a May 18 commemoration in Colombo, individuals from the Sinhalese nationalist group &#8220;Ravana Balaya&#8221; attempted to disturb the event outside Borella cemetery. Police and riot control units arrived and dispersed both groups.On June 7, police arrested parliamentarian Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam, leader of the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF), at his Colombo residence for obstructing police duties. The arrest came after he did not appear to give a statement to police regarding a June 2 incident at a TNPF meeting when individuals, later identified as intelligence and police officers, filmed the gathering and refused to show their identification cards. The Kilinochchi Magistrate Court released Ponnambalam on bail later the same day. The judge criticized police for hastily arresting the parliamentarian, despite his agreeing to make a statement the following day.On July 23, a group of Tamil and Sinhala civil society activists and religious leaders convened a silent protest near the Borella Cemetery in Colombo to mark the 40th anniversary of the killing of thousands of Tamils in 1983 with overt or tacit government approval. Members of a Sinhalese nationalist group disrupted the proceedings, despite heavy police presence, and accused the participants of supporting the LTTE and terrorism. Riot police asked the activists, not the disruptors, to disperse immediately.On September 18, police arrested four men and two women for assaulting the Jaffna district TNPF parliamentarian and Secretary General Selvarasa Kajendran the previous day while commemorating a former LTTE leader known as Thileepan, who fasted to death in 1987. A widely circulated video showed a Sinhalese mob assaulting Kajendran in Trincomalee and attacking with stones and batons a vehicle with Thileepan’s image as it passed through a Sinhalese village. On September 26 Tamils in the north and east held multiple large-scale events to commemorate Thileepan. Multiple courts in the north and east rejected police requests to ban the events, ruling commemorating the dead was a fundamental right.In the months after President Wickremesinghe assumed power in 2022, police arrested several dozen protest leaders on various charges related to the 2022 protest movement. A large majority of those arrested were released on bail, and as of September their cases remained pending.						Freedom of Association						The law provided for freedom of association but imposed restrictions on NGOs and criminalized association with or membership in banned organizations. Religious organizations, including Muslim and Christian groups, reported incidents of intimidation.During the year, civil society reported allegations of monitoring, surveillance, intimidation, and harassment of civil society organizations, religious organizations, human rights defenders, and families of victims of rights violations. Harassment included repeated visits by the Counterterrorism Investigation Division (TID), the CID, and other state security services, which questioned organizations regarding their staff, finances, and activities. Human rights activists alleged unknown actors believed to be state security officials would call them, issuing threats, alleging staffers had supported terrorism, or suggesting the activists were being surveilled. Organizations that received frequent visits were in three overlapping categories: those located in the North and East Provinces; those whose key activities focused on human rights, accountability, or transitional justice; and those publicly known to engage with the international community.On August 28, Minister of Public Security Tiran Alles announced plans to require all NGOs to register with the NGO Secretariat, and to prohibit any unregistered NGO from operating. Some NGOs reported those organizations that fell under the secretariat’s authority were compelled to seek prior approval for submitting proposals and subsequently for project activities, faced imposition of strict rules and conditions to obtain approvals, received directives on how to apportion or use financial resources, and faced badgering and criticism during approvals of their annual plans. Smaller organizations reported they believed they were compelled to attend meetings convened by the secretariat, and that failure to do so would result in their organizations’ activities and approval being adversely affected. NGOs receiving foreign funding reported police officers, including TID and CID agents, visited their offices or called them in (sometimes asking them to travel to Colombo from other provinces) for lengthy and sometimes repeated interrogations related to their project funding and activities. NGO Secretariat officials explained that the CID investigations were based on Central Bank of Sri Lanka counterterrorist financing and anti-money-laundering regulations and that the CID was the correct statutory body to conduct such investigations. Some private individuals and businesses reported being subjected to similar investigations.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights. Human rights organizations described military presence, including numerous military checkpoints, in the north and east as part of government security efforts and to prevent drug trafficking.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum: The law did not provide for the granting of asylum or refugee status and the government had not established a system for providing protection to refugees. Remaining in the country as a recognized refugee was not permitted; however, refugees were present and remained in the country. A 2005 memorandum of understanding allowed UNHCR to operate in the country to conduct refugee registration and status determinations. But with no legal or policy framework on asylum in the country, entering the country to seek asylum remained difficult. UNHCR also facilitated durable solutions for refugees in the form of resettlement to third countries. The government relied on UNHCR to provide food, housing, and education for refugees in the country and to pursue third-country resettlement for them. Asylum seekers, however, had to rely on the support of NGOs for basic needs. According to UNHCR, the office planned to close operations in the country at the end of 2024.Employment: The law did not permit refugees and asylum seekers to work, but many worked informally, which meant they typically earned low wages and did not benefit from traditional workplace protections.Access to Basic Services: The law did not permit refugees and asylum seekers to enroll in the government school system.																																				f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)										The country’s civil war, which ended in 2009, caused widespread, prolonged displacement, including forced displacement by the government and the LTTE, particularly of Tamil and Muslim civilians. The Ministry of Urban Development and Housing was responsible for IDP matters. The government had policies in place for IDPs’ safe and voluntary resettlement or return to their land but did not always effectively implement them. Most IDPs continued to reside in Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, and Batticaloa Districts in the north and east. While all IDPs had full freedom of movement, most were unable to return home due to land mines; restrictions designating their home areas as part of HSZs; lack of economic opportunities; inability to access basic public services, including acquiring documents verifying land ownership; lack of government resolution of competing land ownership claims; and other war-related reasons.On August 9, the president told parliament there were 15 Welfare Centers in Jaffna with a total of 136 IDP families and that 2,175 additional families were staying with friends and relatives. There were no Welfare Centers in Kilinochchi, with 359 IDP families with friends and relatives. There were no Welfare Centers in the Eastern Province, and a smaller number of IDPs in Trincomalee and Ampara Districts were living with friends and relatives.For further information about IDPs in the country, please see the materials of the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center at  https://www.internal-displacement.org/ .																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution provided citizens with the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: The most recent national elections, held in 2020, were reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities. In 2022, parliament, via a secret ballot vote, elected Ranil Wickremesinghe as president to complete the term of resigned president Gotabaya Rajapaksa through 2024. The vote by parliament to elect Wickremesinghe as president after Rajapaksa’s resignation followed procedures outlined in the constitution.On January 21, the National Election Commission announced local government elections would be held on March 9. The country last held local government elections in 2018 and in 2022 extended the terms of the 341 local councils for one year. Opposition parties filed a fundamental rights petition against the government’s decision not to release money for elections due to the economic crisis. On March 3, the Supreme Court issued an interim order preventing the finance secretary, the attorney general, and any other state official from withholding funds that had been allocated in the 2023 budget for local government elections. The Election Commission subsequently scheduled April 25 as the new date for the elections. The Finance Ministry, with President Wickremesinghe also serving as minister of finance, still did not release funds. On April 19, the Election Commission announced local elections would not be held on April 25. The terms of all local councils expired in March, and the central government took control of local administration. As of the end of October, local government elections continued to be indefinitely postponed. Elections for provincial councils, the second tier of government below parliament, also remained indefinitely postponed with all provincial councils defunct since 2018.Civil society, international NGOs, and some opposition political groups criticized the government’s postponement of local elections as a political move. There were multiple peaceful protests throughout the country following the postponement, with an estimated 10,000-17,000 participants.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, but the government did not implement the law effectively. There were numerous reports of government corruption during the year.Corruption: Corruption remained a significant and continuing problem, including at the highest levels of government. International companies frequently reported requests for bribes on matters ranging from customs clearances to government procurement. In July parliament passed, by unanimous consent, new anti-corruption legislation. This was a required structural benchmark of the International Monetary Fund program. The legislation expanded the mandate of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) and changed both the way CIABOC was funded and how it could recruit investigators in order to provide greater independence. The law required politicians to publicly declare assets. The law also expanded and created new criminal offenses for corruption, including recognizing the demand for sexual favors as a criminal form of corruption, and increased the fines for offenses.Numerous civil society groups criticized the law for insufficient whistleblower protections and for insufficient protection of the right to information, but overall they welcomed the law as a step in the right direction. Civil society and the private sector saw a window of opportunity to address endemic corruption in the country but were concerned the government and CIABOC lacked the capacity and political will to do so. There was long-standing and widespread impunity for government officials accused of corruption, and police and the judiciary lacked training in addressing complicated cases of financial crimes.In March the Colombo High Court ordered charges dropped against former parliamentarian Sajin Vass Gunawardena, who was accused of misappropriating nearly 883 million rupees ($2.7 million) while he was the CEO of state-owned airline Mihin Lanka. CIABOC had filed the case against Gunawardena in 2016.Corruption in the health sector regarding the procurement of medicines and medical equipment attracted significant attention during the year after multiple deaths and serious injuries were reported at state hospitals, allegedly due to substandard drugs.CIABOC reported it received 1,749 complaints of corruption from January through July. During this period, CIABOC filed 42 corruption cases, and the courts convicted eight individuals of corruption (all low-level officials).For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						A variety of domestic and international human rights groups monitored and investigated human rights conditions and cases and published their findings. Government officials, however, were unreceptive to findings and employed bureaucratic obfuscation to inhibit the work of such organizations.Retribution against Human Rights Defenders: Numerous human rights defenders reported police and security services continued a high degree of monitoring and surveillance of them through “burdensome and arbitrary” reporting requirements and harassment and intimidation during in-person home and office visits. These visits were often followed by additional visits, letters, or telephone calls. The frequency of these actions varied depending on the organization or individual’s mission or geographic location, with those in the north and east reporting the greatest number of follow-up actions. Individuals reported the visits caused distress, anxiety, and other mental health problems for themselves and their families, as well as affecting their work. Women reported they were particularly affected by surveillance, intimidation, and harassment, given their prominent role in advocating for justice.K. Lavakusarasa, coordinator of AHAM Humanitarian Resource Center (AHRC) in Trincomalee and the convenor of the North-East Coordinating Committee, reported multiple instances where TID and police harassed and questioned him and other organizations working with the committee. On June 28, the divisional secretary of the Muthur Division, Trincomalee, in a letter ordered the AHRC to halt implementation of all projects until it received district secretary approval. The letter cited complaints from the local community as well as concerns from security forces. On July 11, two TID officers from Trincomalee visited the AHRC office and questioned staff regarding the organization’s financial transactions. On July 18, the TID summoned Lavakusarasa to the TID office and questioned him for three hours regarding his organization’s funding, project activities, and its advocacy on human rights and a political solution.The United Nations or Other International Bodies: The government cooperated with and participated in the fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the country under the UNHRC in February. In June the OHCHR gave an oral statement on the country, and on September 11, the OHCHR provided a written update. The OHCHR noted the government provided information to the OHCHR during report drafting but did not support the OHCHR Sri Lanka Accountability Project. The government did not allow members of the Sri Lanka Accountability Project to travel to the country for the purpose of collecting and preserving evidence of human rights abuses. The OHCHR noted that as of August the government had seven pending requests for visits by UN special procedures.Government Human Rights Bodies: The HRCSL had jurisdiction to investigate human rights violations. The HRCSL consisted of five commissioners and had divisions for investigations, education, monitoring and review, and administration and finance. The HRCSL accepted complaints from the public and could also initiate investigations. After an allegation was proven to the satisfaction of the commission, the HRCSL could recommend financial compensation for victims, refer the case for administrative disciplinary action or to the attorney general for prosecution, or both. If the government did not follow an HRCSL request for evidence, the HRCSL could summon witnesses from the government to explain its action. If the HRCSL found the government had not complied with its request, the HRCSL could refer the case to the High Court for prosecution for contempt, an offense punishable by imprisonment or fine. By statute the HRCSL had wide powers and resources and could not be called as a witness in any court of law or be sued for matters relating to its official duties. Rights groups assessed the HRCSL did not operate independent of and without interference from the government.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: The law prohibited rape and domestic violence, but enforcement of the law was inconsistent. The law did not criminalize rape of men as the law defined the act of rape as being a man having sexual intercourse with a woman without the consent of the woman, although it did criminalize “grave sexual abuse.” The law prohibited spousal rape only if the spouses were legally separated. The prescribed penalties for rape were seven to 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine. For domestic violence, a victim could obtain a protection order for one year and request a maintenance allowance.Women’s organizations reported police and judiciary responses to rape and domestic violence incidents and cases were inadequate. NGOs reported many police officers did not have sufficient gender-sensitivity training to deal with survivors of sexual violence, and there was a lack of Tamil-speaking judicial medical officers.Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): The law did not prohibit FGM/C for women and girls. Some of the country’s Muslims historically practiced FGM/C. There were no recent statistics on the prevalence of FGM/C in the country, but one NGO reported that it was highly prevalent among the small Dawoodi Bohra community (fewer than 3,000 persons), where it was considered a mandatory ritual, and common among Moor and Malay communities. A 2018 Ministry of Health circular banned medical practitioners from carrying out FGM/C, but since the practice was usually carried out by traditional practitioners, activists said the prohibition had little effect. Several civil society groups led mostly by Muslim women continued to campaign against FGM/C.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: Sexual harassment was common. Women from the north, mostly from minority communities, reported military officials at security checkpoints targeted women for unnecessary body searches. Women from the north and east, mostly from minority communities, also reported male security officers often questioned women in their homes without family members present. There were widespread complaints by women employees in parliament of sexual harassment and sexual abuse by senior parliament officials. In August the general secretary of parliament launched an internal investigation into the allegations, media reported. Women police officers also complained of harassment from male colleagues. The United Nations and local NGOs reported women were the most prevalent target of online hate speech.Discrimination: Women had equal rights to men under civil and criminal law, although societal discrimination existed throughout the country. Adjudication of questions related to family law, including marriage, divorce, child custody, and inheritance, varied according to the customary law of each ethnic or religious group, resulting in discrimination. Women faced a range of workforce restrictions, including caps on overtime work and limits on nighttime shifts. Women were prohibited from working at night in the services sector. A 2021 Department of Census and Statistics Labor Force Survey (most recent data available) found that women had a much lower labor force participation rate than men and faced higher unemployment rates. Monthly average income was less for women than it was for men.In February the cabinet approved a National Policy on Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment. The policy standardized the development of laws, policies, and programs to afford equal rights for women. Also in February, the cabinet adopted the country’s first National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security for 2023-2027.Many considered the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act to discriminate against women due to provisions that allowed for polygamy, allowed girls as young as 12 to be married, allowed young women to be married without their consent, and barred women from serving as quazis (Islamic judges).Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.A group of civil society organizations reported involuntary sterilization affected some marginalized communities experiencing acute poverty, especially Tamil plantation workers, when doctors opted for caesareans when delivering babies so that it was possible to perform sterilization at the same time, following consent from the woman’s husband. They reported these doctors did not always obtain consent from the woman.Couples and individuals had the right to decide the number, spacing, and timing of their children and to manage their reproductive health. They had access to the information and means to do so, free from discrimination, coercion, or violence, however some NGOs reported sex education in the country was inadequate, especially after the closure of some family planning facilities due to COVID-19. A National Institutes of Health study published during the year found that knowledge of sexual and reproductive health, including contraception options, was poor among adolescents and youth in the country.In July Amnesty International reported many pregnant and breastfeeding women lacked access to adequate nutrition due to the 2022 economic crisis. Individuals were also affected by medicine shortages resulting from the economic crisis. Some NGOs reported that Tamils working in the plantation sector had less access to health services and experienced rates of infant and maternal mortality that were higher than the national average.The government provided access to sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence, including emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis. Emergency contraception was available at government hospitals and Ministry of Health clinics and was provided free of charge. NGOs reported police, however, were often unaware of resources available, limiting referrals.Women and girls had access to menstruation hygiene; however, local media reported rising prices due to the economic crisis meant some individuals could not afford menstrual hygiene products. NGOs and local media reported many women and girls stayed home during menstruation due to lack of awareness of menstrual hygiene, inability to afford menstrual hygiene products, and in some cases inadequate sanitation and disposal facilities at schools.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution provided for the right to equality before the law and prohibited discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, and place of birth.Both Hill Country (or Malaiyaha) Tamils and Tamils from the north and east maintained that they suffered long-standing, systematic discrimination in university education, government employment, housing, health services, language laws, and procedures for naturalization of noncitizens. Throughout the country, but especially in the north and east, Tamils reported security forces regularly monitored and harassed members of their community, especially activists, journalists, NGO staff, and former or suspected former LTTE members.During the year, the Hill Country Tamil community held events to mark the 200th anniversary of the first Hill Country Tamils’ arrival in the country and to call for solutions to the community’s problems. Media and NGOs reported Hill Country Tamils were among the most socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, and most Hill Country Tamils did not own land, especially those working on plantations. All plantation land belonged to the government and was on long-term lease to plantation companies; disputes over whether the government or companies held responsibility for maintaining workers’ housing meant housing in these communities was overcrowded and often lacked adequate water and sanitation facilities. Local politicians and NGOs reported the government did not recognize many predominantly Hill Country Tamil communities as official villages and as a result residents did not qualify for many government services.																																				Indigenous Peoples										The country’s Indigenous people, known as Veddas, reportedly numbered fewer than 1,000. Some preferred to maintain their traditional way of life, and the law generally protected them, although some faced land encroachment. They freely participated in political and economic life without legal restrictions, but some did not have legal documents.																																				Children										Child Abuse: The law prohibited child abuse, including physical, sexual, and psychological abuse, and child neglect. The government enforced the law but did not enforce the law effectively. There remained a significant level of public concern regarding the high incidence of violence, including sexual violence, against children, as well as incidents of online violence and bullying. Local media reported increased rates of online child abuse, including sexual abuse, after the COVID-19 pandemic but maintained that a lack of understanding of online abuse meant it was underreported. There was also continued concern regarding the impact of the economic crisis on vulnerable children, including access to food and basic services. Women reported that children faced increased sexual abuse from family members when mothers traveled abroad for employment. One local NGO reported inadequate policing and a general tolerance of corporal punishment contributed to a cycle of violence against children.Despite laws on child abuse, cruelty to children and their exploitation in trafficking and child labor persisted. Penalties varied based on the type and degree of child abuse, but trials tended to last for years.There were multiple reports of physical and sexual abuse of underage novice monks at Buddhist temples across the country. In April a child monk, age eight, at a temple in Gampola was admitted to the hospital with what media called severe injuries. The child alleged senior monks assaulted him after he incorrectly recited sermons. Police recorded a statement from the temple chief, but as of September 11 no arrests had been made. Media and local NGOs alleged Buddhist leadership did not adequately address widespread reports of child abuse in temples. The minister of Buddhasasana, religious, and cultural affairs in July said he appointed a committee to establish regulations regarding child ordination.Most child abuse complaints were received by the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA) via a toll-free 24-hour hotline. Civil society organizations working on children’s matters asserted children had insufficient mechanisms to safely report domestic violence or abuse. Although police stations were supposed to have an officer dedicated to handling abuse complaints from women and children, the government did not consistently implement this practice nationwide. The police department’s Children and Women Bureau played a major role in investigating abuse cases, but depending on the severity of the case, some fell under the jurisdiction of the magistrates’ courts as outlined in the criminal procedure code. In these instances, police filed a formal complaint sheet and began a judicial medical process. The attorney general filed indictments for child abuse cases exclusively in high courts.As of September, the NCPA received 5,456 complaints of child abuse including reports of child cruelty, serious injuries, sexual abuse, children being utilized in begging, and complaints regarding the use of social media and abuse of children in cyberspace.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: Civil law set the minimum legal age for marriage at 18 for both men and women, although girls could marry at age 16 with parental consent. The law was enforced by the government. According to the penal code, sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 16, with or without her consent, amounted to statutory rape. The provision, however, did not apply to married Muslim girls older than 12. The Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act, which applied only to Muslims, permitted the marriage of girls as young as 12 with the consent of the bride’s father, other male relatives, or a quazi.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited the sale or use of children for commercial sexual exploitation offering or procuring a child for child sex trafficking, and practices related to child pornography, but authorities did not always enforce the law. The minimum age for consensual sex was 16. As of September, the NCPA received 273 complaints of sexual abuse of children.																																				Antisemitism										There was a small Jewish population living in different parts of the country. There were no known reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: The law criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults. Those convicted of engaging in same-sex sexual activity faced up to 10 years’ imprisonment. Although arrests and prosecutions were rare, human rights organizations reported police used the threat of arrest to assault and harass lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) persons. The law also criminalized gender impersonation, which activists reported police sometimes used to harass transgender persons.Violence and Harassment: A 2021 report from Equal Ground, an organization that advocated for LGBTQI+ human rights in the country, documented that approximately 10 percent of LGBTQI+ persons who responded to a national survey had experienced physical assault due to their sexual orientation or gender. Some LGBTQI+ persons reported they feared being arrested for their sexuality if they went to police. In March the HRCSL issued guidelines for police officers regarding interaction with transgender persons to foster police respect for the rights and dignity of the transgender community.In June, during Pride month activities, police reported increased online threats towards the LGBTQI+ community. A UN report tracking hate speech on social media in the country also recorded a sharp increase in June in hate speech and threats targeting the LGBTQI+ community. Local organizations reported incidents of protesters attempting to disrupt Pride events but stated in most cases police defused the situation.Discrimination: The constitution prohibited discrimination based on sex, and the Attorney General’s Department stated this implicitly granted equal rights to LGBTQI+ persons and protected them from discrimination. Antidiscrimination laws, however, did not explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and discrimination was widespread. Some members of the LGBTQI+ community reported having been refused employment or forced out of work due to their sexual orientation.A March publication from Bridge to Equality, a local LGBTQI+ advocacy organization, reported 235 violations of human rights against LGBTQI+ persons over the previous two years. Of these, 149 cases had been submitted to the HRCSL for action. More than 90 percent of the complaints involved discrimination and violations of equal protection under the law. More than 50 percent also included complaints of cruel, inhuman, or humiliating treatment. Bridge to Equality reported police were the most frequent perpetrators, cited in more than 40 percent of the complaints. Medical professionals were the second most common perpetrators, in more than 27 percent of the complaints, followed by officers in municipal councils in nearly 10 percent of complaints.Transgender persons continued to face societal discrimination, including mistreatment, and discrimination accessing employment, housing, and health care.In January the Court of Appeal concluded a discrimination case against police, originally filed in 2021, with a ruling in favor of the petitioner. The 2021 petition accused a police trainer of using material that was discriminatory and derogatory towards the LGBTQI+ community during training for police officers. The Court of Appeal ruled the police trainer was bound by the police order (published as a result of the case) that prohibited arbitrary arrest, discrimination, and harassment of transgender persons.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: Transgender persons could request a Gender Recognition Certificate if they wished to change the sex on their birth certificate. The Ministry of Health provided specialist psychiatric services to the transgender community. Transgender persons, however, reported the process to obtain a certificate was overly burdensome and included a mandatory psychiatric evaluation, which they said was difficult to obtain. They said some government officials did not support or understand the Gender Recognition Certificate process and the requirements to obtain them were not clear. The HRCSL reported receiving complaints of problems with the name and sex change process at registrar offices, and stated it intervened on behalf of the complainants. Medical gender reassignment procedures were free and covered by the health system, but human rights organizations reported in practice it was difficult to find doctors who understood transgender matters and provided adequate care. They stated sometimes hormone treatment was not available.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: There were some reports of so-called conversion therapy. According to LGBTQI+ community members, some parents sent their LGBTQI+ children to so-called therapy that included forced medication and harmful religious rituals. One activist in an interview said many parents believed their children needed conversion therapy so they could lead a normal life. There were no reports of irreversible “normalization” surgeries performed on children or nonconsenting adult intersex persons.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no reported restrictions of freedom of expression, association, or peaceful assembly regarding LGBTQI+ matters.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Various laws forbade discrimination against any person with physical, sensory, intellectual, or mental disabilities in employment, education, air travel, other public transportation, and access to health care. In practice, however, discrimination and barriers to accessibility occurred in employment, education, and provision of state services, including public transportation. Children with disabilities attended school at a lower rate than other children. Schools catering to children with disabilities described a general lack of understanding of disabilities among families, and a stigma against hiring youth with disabilities. There were regulations on accessibility, but accommodation for access to buildings and public transportation for persons with disabilities was rare. Disability rights groups alleged the government showed no interest in taking steps to implement further protections for persons with disabilities. Disability rights groups from the north, primarily Tamil, reported many women who were injured during the war did not have legal recognition for their disabilities and thus did not receive monthly social security benefits for which they were eligible.There were legal provisions for assisted voting of persons with disabilities. Persons with a partial or full visual or physical disability could complete their ballot with the assistance of a person of their choice or the senior presiding officer if they were unable to be accompanied by an assistant. According to the Asian Network for Free Elections, most polling stations had stairs or steps, affecting wheelchair accessibility. In January the Election Commission conducted outreach to promote access to polls for persons with disabilities.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										The government did not always effectively enforce antidiscrimination laws, and discrimination based on race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, or place of birth occurred with respect to employment and occupation. Penalties were commensurate with those under laws related to civil rights, such as election interference. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators.The law did not prohibit employment or occupational discrimination based on HIV-positive status or status regarding other communicable disease. Persons who provided HIV prevention services and groups at high risk of infection with HIV reportedly suffered discrimination. In addition, hospital officials reportedly publicized the HIV-positive status of their patients and occasionally refused to provide health care to persons with HIV.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers to form and join unions of their choice. Exceptions included members of the armed forces, police officers, judicial officers, and prison officers. Workers in nonessential services industries, except for workers in public-service unions, had the legal right to bargain collectively. The law did not explicitly recognize the right to strike, but courts recognized an implied right to strike based on the Trade Unions Ordinance and the Industrial Disputes Act.The law prohibited antiunion discrimination. Labor laws did not cover domestic workers employed in the homes of others or informal-sector workers, but there was an active domestic workers’ union. The law allowed unions to conduct their activities without interference, but the government enforced the law unevenly. Nonunion worker councils tended to represent labor in export-processing zone (EPZ) enterprises, although several unions operated in the zones. According to the Board of Investment, which operated the EPZs, if both a recognized trade union with bargaining power and a nonunion worker council existed in an enterprise, the trade union would have the power to represent the employees in collective bargaining.Under emergency regulations of the public-security ordinance, the president had broad discretion to declare sectors “essential” to national security, the life of the community, or the preservation of public order and to revoke those workers’ rights to conduct legal strikes. In addition to the public-security ordinance, the law allowed the president to declare services provided by government agencies as “essential” public services. The law prohibited retribution against striking workers in nonessential sectors.Seven workers might form a union, adopt a charter, elect leaders, and publicize their views, but a union had to represent 40 percent of workers at a given enterprise before the law obligated the employer to bargain with the union. Unions that did not meet the 40 percent threshold could merge with others and operate as one. The law did not permit public-sector unions to form federations or represent workers from more than one branch or department of government. The Labor Ministry could cancel a union’s registration if it failed to submit an annual report for three years.Violations for antiunion discrimination could result in a fine. The law required an employer found guilty of antiunion discrimination to reinstate workers fired for union activities, but the company could transfer them to different locations. Penalties for violations were commensurate with those under other laws involving denial of civil rights, such as discrimination. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators.Only the Department of Labor could bring antiunion discrimination cases before a magistrate court, not those individuals or organizations alleging such discrimination. The Department of Labor reported that during the year no new cases were filed with the courts against companies under the Industrial Disputes Act. Four previously filed cases were closed, and nine cases remained pending. Citing routine government inaction on alleged violations of labor rights, some unions pressed for standing to sue for such practices, while some smaller unions did not want that ability because of the cost of filing cases. The Department of Labor reported that during the year workers filed six cases under the Termination of Employment and Workmen Act and 684 cases under the Payment of Gratuity Act.The Industrial Dispute Act did not apply to the public sector, and public-sector unions had no formal dispute resolution mechanism. In addition, most large-scale private firms in the services sector, other than banks and tourist hotels, prohibited forming or joining a labor union within work premises and included it as a binding clause in the letter of appointment or contracts signed between the employee and the firm; this practice transgressed the country’s legal framework.The government generally respected workers’ freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively. In May the Labor Ministry reconstituted the National Labor Advisory Council (NLAC), a tripartite council to promote dialogue among the government, employers’ unions and employees’ unions that had been inactive for much of 2022. In reconstituting the NLAC, the Labor Ministry changed the criteria for unions’ membership, resulting in representatives from four trade unions being removed from the council, including the United Federation of Labor (UFL). Swasthika Arulingam, the UFL’s permanent representative, had been the first and only woman member of the NLAC. Local and regional workers unions and civil society organizations condemned the removal of four unions from the NLAC, and in particular criticized Arulingam’s removal. One open letter from trade unions and civil society organizations accused the government of excluding women from decision making on labor policy. The Labor Ministry stated the reconstitution was routine in line with obligations under the International Labor Organization, and stated the criteria were based solely on trade union membership. No other trade union put forward a woman representative.During the year, there were multiple trade union actions to protest economic policies enacted as part of the International Monetary Fund program. On February 21, electricity workers held a strike to protest the government raising personal income taxes. On March 15, public employees at ports, hospitals, schools, and railways across the country held a one-day strike to protest the increased taxes as well as the high cost of living in the wake of the 2022 economic crisis. While some unions in the public sector were politically independent, most large unions were affiliated with political parties and played prominent roles in the political process. Unions alleged that employers often indefinitely delayed recognition of unions to avoid collective bargaining, decrease support for unionization, or identify, terminate, and sometimes assault or threaten union activists. The Ministry of Labor required labor commissioners to hold union certification elections within 30 working days of an application for registration if there was no objection, or within 45 working days if there was an objection.In August 2022, police arrested General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Teachers’ Union Joseph Stalin – a prominent trade union leader who was active in the 2022 protest movement – for violating a court order during a protest march. Civil society widely condemned Stalin’s arrest. Stalin was granted bail by the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court in August 2022. As of the end of October, the case against Stalin continued.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/ .																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The national minimum wage law included a daily minimum wage and provided different minimum wages for different industries. The Department of Labor’s wage boards continued to set minimum wages and working conditions by sector and industry in consultation with unions and employers. The minimum private-sector and public-sector wages were above the government’s official poverty line. The law prohibited most full-time workers from regularly working more than 45 hours per week (a five and a half-day workweek). In addition, the law stipulated a rest period of one hour per day. Regulations limited maximum overtime hours to 15 hours per week. Overtime pay was 1.5 times the basic wage and was paid for work beyond 45 hours per week and work on Sundays or holidays. The provision limiting basic work hours was not applicable to managers and executives in public institutions. The law provided for paid annual holidays.Civil society organizations and local politicians maintained that in the tea estate sector companies kept real salaries low by offering employees fewer days of work per month and using contracted laborers who did not receive benefits. The minimum wage for tea pickers was 1,000 rupees ($3) per day, but workers said some companies refused to pay the minimum wage.Occupational Safety and Health: The government set occupational safety and health (OSH) standards that were generally appropriate for the main industries in the country. Workers had the right to remove themselves from dangerous situations, but many workers had no knowledge of such rights or feared they would lose their jobs if they did so. OSH standards in the rapidly growing construction sector, including infrastructure development projects such as port, airport, and road construction, as well as high-rise buildings, were insufficient. Employers, particularly those in the construction industry, increasingly used contract employment for work of a regular nature, and contract workers had fewer safeguards. Labor regulations applied whenever a company had at least one permanent employee, but seasonal workers were not necessarily covered.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: Penalties for violating minimum wage and hours of work laws were a fine, six months’ imprisonment, or both. Labor Ministry inspectors verified whether employers fully paid employees and contributed to pension funds as required by law. Unions questioned, however, whether the ministry’s inspections were effective. The Labor Department used a computerized labor information system application designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of inspections, but officials and trade unions noted concerns that the system was not well maintained.Authorities did not effectively enforce OSH standards in all sectors. The Labor Ministry’s resources, inspections, and remediation efforts were insufficient. The number of labor inspectors was insufficient for the country’s workforce. Civil society organizations accused the Labor Department of being “lax with regards to the tea estate sector” and not thoroughly investigating labor complaints.Penalties for wage, hour, and OSH violations were commensurate with those for crimes such as fraud or negligence. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators.According to the 2021 Labor Force Survey (most recent data available), approximately 58 percent of the country’s workforce was employed in the informal sector. In agriculture, approximately 89 percent of employment was informal. Labor inspectors did not monitor wages or working conditions or provide programs or social protections for informal-sector workers.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																												Freedom of Association																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																						f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Indigenous Peoples																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																								Sri Lanka
- Ex-post Evaluation of Trafficking in Persons Projects in Sri Lanka -->			HomeSri Lanka						hide			 -->	$( document ).ready(function() {		if ($(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {			$(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){				$("#bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");				$(".bc_middle").toggle();				$(".bc_ellipse").toggle();				$(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");			});			$("#bc_hide").click(function(){				$("#bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");				$(".bc_middle").toggle();				$(".bc_ellipse").toggle();				$(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");			});		} else {			$(".bc_ellipse").hide();		}	}); -->Ex-post Evaluation of Trafficking in Persons Projects in Sri LankaJuly 2022A 2021 evaluation commissioned by the Department of State found that projects funded by the U.S. Government have made a positive impact in enhancing the Government of Sri Lanka’s capacity to address trafficking in persons and to raise the government’s awareness and interest in this issue.BackgroundThe Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (J/TIP) and other parts of the U.S. Government have funded at least 11 projects to combat human trafficking in Sri Lanka between 2007 and 2021.The objectives of these J/TIP projects include:Increase service provision for trafficking victimsCollaborate with Sri Lankan stakeholders to raise public awareness of all forms of human traffickingTrain Sri Lankan criminal justice system actors in using victim-centered and trauma-informed approaches to hold traffickers accountableFindingsThe evaluation of the J/TIP projects concluded that:The culmination of enhanced training, capacity building, and community awareness activities led to successful government buy-in and support.Projects influenced the Government of Sri Lanka’s approach to interagency collaboration, and identification and reporting of trafficking cases.Improvement is required in the services offered to victims, the Government of Sri Lanka’s coordinating trafficking in persons structures, and data collection systems.RecommendationsProactively identify trafficking victims, including among undocumented migrant workers abroad, women in commercial sex, and People’s Republic of China (PRC) working on PRC government affiliated projects.Ensure victims are not penalized for unlawful acts traffickers compelled them to commit, including through increased training of law enforcement and the judiciary.Provide support to victims who participate in trials against their traffickers, including the cost of lodging and travel expenses during trails.Use Section 360(C) of the penal code to prosecute child sex traffickers.Improve victim services, including their quality and accessibility, and ensure shelter and specialized services are available for all identified victims, including men and victims exploited abroad.Evaluation QuestionsWhich U.S. Government efforts are perceived by government and non-government stakeholders to have had themost positive impact on the Government of Sri Lanka’s approach to trafficking in persons?Which aspects of Sri Lanka’s approach to trafficking in persons are perceived to have changed as a result of specific U.S. Government programming?Where has the Government of Sri Lanka played a substantial positive role in trafficking in persons projects funded by the U.S. Government? Where has the Government of Sri Lanka fallen short in its expected role?What is missing from Sri Lanka’s current approach that could positively affect Sri Lanka’s approach to trafficking in persons?Detailed FindingsThis evaluation found that capacity building, principally for Government of Sri Lanka actors, played a crucial role in engaging government officials to identify and address cases of trafficking in persons. Most changes in the Government of Sri Lanka’s approach since 2007 were either partly or directly related to U.S. Government-supported programming. The Government of Sri Lanka played an important role in trafficking projects supported by the U.S. Government. Areas cited as needing increased attention include more inclusive and institutionalized training for law enforcement, victim identification and support, and reaching divisional and district levels in expanded locations with high trafficking in persons rates. Overall, this study concluded that these anti-trafficking projects were useful and similar efforts would be valuable going forward. A commonly cited area for improvement identified by some implementers and sub-recipients included increased support services for victims of trafficking as they navigated the legal process and encountered additional challenges.Approach, Methods, &amp; DataEvaluation Approach: This evaluation used a mixed-methods approach that leverages primary project documentation, third-party data, and qualitative information collected through key informant interviews (KIIs) to respond to the evaluation objectives.&nbsp;Data Collections: Data collection included 1) document review; 2) KIIs with project implementers and their sub-grantees; 3) surveys with other key stakeholders; and 4) desk reviews of available pertinent documents related to projects in Sri Lanka, Trafficking in Persons Reports from 2007 to 2021, and government data. Four groups of KIIs provide in-depth evaluation of U.S. Government-funded projects’ engagement with the Government of Sri Lanka. Open-ended interview protocols guided the interview process. Surveys conducted by phone with five categories of participants representing a variety of stakeholder types were conducted in the preferred language of the respondent.&nbsp;Impact by Numbers11U.S. Government-funded projects between 2007 and 2021 to combat trafficking&nbsp;51%Increased rate of interagency collaboration in Sri Lanka due to these projects&nbsp;87%Evaluation interviews noted direct or partial attribution to U.S. Government funding&nbsp;100%Percentage of Sri Lankan trainees and actors surveyed who said they changed their approach due to these projectsLearning SummaryAs a result of the evaluation, J/TIP arranged a meeting with the Sri Lankan National Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force (NAHTTF) to discuss findings. To increase collaboration between the NAHTTF and local-level stakeholders, five local NGOs from the TIP District Forums were also invited to participate in the discussion.&nbsp;J/TIP plans to:&nbsp;Increase the Government of Sri Lanka’s involvement with U.S. Government programs as early as possible in program design to ensure effective, sustainable interventions.&nbsp;Co-develop training programs with national stakeholders to institutionalize the capacity building of the Government of Sri Lanka officials.&nbsp;Assist the Government of Sri Lanka in formalizing their cooperation with District Forums on human trafficking throughout the country.&nbsp;
- Special Advisor on International Disability Rights Minkara’s Travel to Sri Lanka, Nepal, Laos, and Singapore Office of the SpokespersonU.S. Special Advisor on International Disability Rights (SAIDR) Sara Minkara traveled to Sri Lanka, Nepal, Laos, and Singapore from March 6 to 23 to engage with host government officials, civil society, and veterans with disabilities on how to integrate disability rights issues across government, industry, and society.In Sri Lanka, SAIDR Minkara met with government officials and civil society to learn about efforts to enhance physical accessibility and political participation for Sri Lankans with disabilities. She also met with demining personnel with disabilities to highlight the benefits of greater disability inclusion in recovery and reconciliation efforts in the aftermath of the Sri Lankan Civil War.In Nepal, she discussed accessible tourism with Nepalese tourism companies and expanding persons with disabilities’ access to legal protections with host government officials. She also gave remarks during a wheelchair marathon, where she emphasized the importance of sports in creating a community for persons with disabilities.In Singapore, she encouraged greater capacity-building ahead of the upcoming meetings of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Ministers Responsible for Trade and the APEC Women and Economy Forum in Arequipa in May, building on discussions from when the United States chaired the forum last year.In Laos, she supported the government’s leadership to drive further integration of disability-inclusive policies during its host year of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
- Deputy Secretary Verma’s Meetings with the Government of Sri Lanka and Civil Society in Colombo Office of the SpokespersonThe below is attributable to Spokesperson Matthew Miller:Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard Verma met with the President of Sri Lanka, Ranil Wickremesinghe, and Foreign Minister Ali Sabry today in Colombo. Deputy Secretary Verma highlighted U.S. support for Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, including through $270 million in economic support and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation’s $553 million in financing to support the Colombo West International Terminal. They also discussed progress on Sri Lanka’s IMF program, including economic and governance reforms aimed at putting Sri Lanka on the path to sustainable economic growth. They explored opportunities to deepen defense and maritime cooperation between the United States and Sri Lanka, including strengthening the Sri Lanka Navy’s capabilities to safeguard national security and promote a more stable Indo-Pacific region. In his meetings with government officials and members of civil society, Deputy Secretary Verma emphasized the importance of protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression, for a more inclusive, prosperous, and democratic Sri Lanka.						Tags																					Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																																Civil Society																															Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Official International Travel																															Sri Lanka
- DRL FY23 Bringing Sri Lanka’s Expression Laws in-line with International Standards United States Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL)Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):  DRL FY23 Bringing Sri Lanka’s Expression Laws in-line with International StandardsThis is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0010225 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:  19.345Type of Solicitation: Open-Source CompetitionApplication Deadline:  11:59 PM EST on Monday, April 22, 2024Total Funding Floor:  $750,000Total Funding Ceiling:  $750,000Anticipated Number of Awards:  1Type of Award: GrantPeriod of Performance:  18-30 monthsAnticipated Time to Award, Pending Availability of Funds:  6-8 monthsA. Project DescriptionThe U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for a project that aims to bring Sri Lanka’s expression laws into compliance with international standards and obligations.In October 2023, the UN Human Rights Office urged the Sri Lankan government to consult with civil society and international experts to bring the draft Online Safety Act (OSA) and draft Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATB) in compliance with Sri Lanka’s international human rights obligations. Both acts use overly broad wording for conduct designated as punishable offences and expand the powers of the police and military to search, arrest, and detain individuals with minimal judicial oversight. However, the recent passing of the OSA does not incorporate suggestions from human rights and international law experts. While the Sri Lankan government states that the OSA bill will provide protection for citizens against online abuse, human rights defenders contend that the bill is aimed at stifling dissent and criticism of the government. The ATB, which is also expected to pass through the Sri Lankan legislature soon, does not adhere to international human rights standards because it leaves space to interpret any act of dissent as terrorism, including peaceful assembly. If passed in its current form, this bill would further limit Sri Lankan citizens’ right to speech and peaceful assembly by allowing arbitrary arrests of political critics, dissidents and human rights defenders in Sri Lanka.  The Sri Lankan government’s use of the ATB, OSA, and other online and offline expression laws to limit civil society challenges democratic rights to assembly and speech.Through this award, DRL aims to strengthen civil society’s capacity to advocate against repressive expression laws and to help increase the Sri Lankan government’s understanding of international human rights obligations as they relate to freedom of speech and assembly.Program outcomes could include one or more of the following but are not limited to:Civil society more safely and effectively documents restrictions to freedom of expression and conducts advocacy on freedom of expression issues in regional, international, and multilateral fora;Civil society and community actors operate and coordinate safely to navigate the legal operating environment as it relates to expression online and offline;Local civil society organizations and international human rights institutions bolster efforts to call for amendments to or repeals of regressive expression laws;Government representatives, law enforcement, and legal actors have a better understanding of Sri Lanka’s international human rights obligations.Program activities can include but are not limited to:Advancing coordinated, multi-stakeholder advocacy among civil society , media, and tech companies to widen space for freedom of expression in Sri Lanka;Strengthening the skills of civil society to safely document Sri Lanka’s limitations on freedom of expression and use documentation of violations as a result of such laws to advance coordinated action;Connecting Sri Lankan civil society with regional and international organizations/mechanisms to increase pressure on government actors to amend/repeal legislation, and to bring draft laws in line with international human rights standards;Advocating against the misuse of Sri Lankan’s freedom of expression laws against civil society and supporting civil society input on draft bills, including but not limited to the ATB;Supporting civil society’s reporting on progress made towards the implementation of recommendations on expression laws;Promoting digital and physical security practices among civil society, journalists, and other civic actors;Engaging with government, law enforcement, and legal actors to remind them of international human rights standards and obligations as they relate to arbitrary detention, arrests, and searches;Promoting public awareness about the impacts of expression laws on online and offline speech.Programs should also clearly state how the approach and activities will differ from and/or build upon other U.S. Government and other foreign funded programs. DRL prefers innovative and creative approaches rather than projects that simply duplicate or add to similar efforts by other entities. This does not exclude from consideration projects that clearly build off existing successful projects in a new and distinct way.A proven ability to implement programs in Sri Lanka must be demonstrated. As part of the proposal narrative, or as an annex to the proposal submission, applicants are encouraged to submit lessons learned from past programming in Sri Lanka that demonstrate how the implementer has safely operated and responded to challenges, learning from both successes and failures, in the operating environment. Successful proposals will demonstrate the projects’ potential to have an immediate impact as well as contribute to long-term, sustainable reforms.Proposals will not be deemed competitive if they cannot demonstrate sustainability independent of continued DRL funding. DRL strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of the most vulnerable or at-risk populations. Proposed programs must address how the participation of women, persons with disabilities, ethnic and religious minority communities, and other marginalized populations fits into program elements.All programs should aim to have impact that leads to reforms and have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources.  DRL’s preference is to avoid duplicating past efforts by supporting new and creative approaches.  This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.DRL is committed to advancing equity and support for underserved and underrepresented communities.  In accordance with the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Underserved Communities, programs should implement strategies for integration and inclusion of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries that can bring perspectives based on their religion, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, national origin, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, pregnancy, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.  Programs should be demand-driven and locally led to the extent possible.DRL requires all programs to be non-discriminatory and expects implementers to include strategies for nondiscrimination of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries based on race, color, religion, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, pregnancy, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.Competitive proposals may also include a summary budget and budget narrative for 3 additional months following the proposed period of performance, indicated above.  This information should indicate what objective(s) and/or activities could be accomplished with additional time and/or funds beyond the proposed period of performance.Where appropriate, competitive proposals may include:Opportunities for beneficiaries to apply their new knowledge and skills in practical efforts;Solicitation of feedback and suggestions from beneficiaries when developing activities to strengthen the sustainability of programs and participant ownership of project outcomes;Input from participants on sustainability plans and systematic review of the plans throughout the life of the project, with adjustments made as necessary;Inclusion of vulnerable populations;Joint identification and definition of key concepts with relevant stakeholders and stakeholder input into project activities;Systematic follow up with beneficiaries at specific intervals after the completion of activities to track how beneficiaries are retaining new knowledge as well as applying their new skills.Activities that are not typically allowed include, but are not limited to:The provision of humanitarian assistance;English language instruction;Development of high-tech computer or communications software and/or hardware;Purely academic exchanges or fellowships;External exchanges or fellowships lasting longer than six months;Off-shore activities that are not clearly linked to in-country initiatives and impact or are not necessary per security concerns;Theoretical explorations of human rights or democracy issues, including projects aimed primarily at research and evaluation that do not incorporate training or capacity-building for local civil society;Micro-loans or similar small business development initiatives;Initiatives directed towards a diaspora community rather than current residents of targeted countries.This notice is subject to availability of funding.B. Federal Award InformationPrimary organizations can submit 1 application in response to the NOFO.The U.S. government may: (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept other than the lowest cost application, (c) accept more than one application, and (d) waive irregularities in applications received.The U.S. government may make award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions or negotiations. Therefore, each initial application should contain the applicant&#8217;s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. The U.S. government reserves the right (though it is under no obligation to do so), however, to enter into discussions with one or more applicants in order to obtain clarifications, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the project description, budget, or other aspects of an application.DRL anticipates awarding either a grant or cooperative agreement depending on the needs and risk factors of the program. The final determination on award mechanism will be made by the Grants Officer. The distinction between grants and cooperative agreements revolves around the existence of “substantial involvement.” Cooperative agreements require greater Federal government participation in the project. If a cooperative agreement is awarded, DRL will undertake reasonable and programmatically necessary substantial involvement. Examples of substantial involvement can include, but are not limited to:Active participation or collaboration with the recipient in the implementation of the award;Review and approval of one stage of work before another can begin;Review and approval of substantive provisions of proposed sub-awards or contracts beyond existing Federal policy;Approval of the recipient’s budget or plan of work prior to the award.The authority for this funding opportunity is found in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA).To maximize the impact and sustainability of the award(s) that result from this NOFO, DRL retains the right to execute non-competitive continuation amendment(s). The total duration of any award, including potential non-competitive continuation amendments, shall not exceed 54 months, or four and a half years. Any non-competitive continuation is contingent on performance and pending availability of funds. A non-competitive continuation is not guaranteed, and the Department of State reserves the right to exercise or not to exercise this option.C. Eligibility InformationFor application information, please see the proposal submission instructions (PSI), updated December 2022 on our website.C.1 Eligible ApplicantsDRL welcomes applications from U.S.-based and foreign-based non-profit organizations/nongovernmental organizations (NGO) and public international organizations; private, public, or state institutions of higher education; and for-profit organizations or businesses. DRL’s preference is to work with non-profit entities; however, there may be some occasions when a for-profit entity is best suited.Applications submitted by for-profit entities may be subject to additional review following the panel selection process. Additionally, the Department of State prohibits profit to for-profit or commercial organizations under its assistance awards. Profit is defined as any amount in excess of allowable direct and indirect costs. The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 30, Cost Accounting Standards Administration, and 48 CFR 31 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.Please see 2 CFR 200.307 for regulations regarding program income.C.2 Cost Sharing or MatchingProviding cost sharing, matching, or cost participation is not an eligibility factor or requirement for this NOFO and providing cost share will not result in a more favorable competitive ranking.C.3 OtherApplicants should have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with thematic or in-country partners, entities, and relevant stakeholders, including private sector partners and NGOs, and have demonstrable experience in administering successful and preferably similar projects. DRL encourages applications from foreign-based NGOs headquartered in the geographic regions/countries relevant to this NOFO. Applicants may form consortia in order to bring together organizations with varied expertise to propose a comprehensive program in one proposal. However, one organization should be designated in the proposal as the lead applicant, with the other members designated as sub-award partners. DRL reserves the right to request additional background information on applicants that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards, and these applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis.DRL is committed to an anti-discrimination policy in all of its programs and activities. DRL welcomes applications irrespective of race, ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or other status. DRL seeks applications that demonstrate that the recipient does not discriminate against any beneficiaries in implementation of a potential award, such as, but not limited to, by withholding, adversely impacting, or denying equitable access to the benefits provided through this award on the basis of any factor not expressly stated in the award.  This includes, for example, race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.  The recipient should insert this provision, including this paragraph, in all sub-grants and contracts under a potential award.Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (www.sam.gov) and/or has a current debt to the U.S. government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR,1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR,1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award. All applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their application.D. Application and Submission InformationD.1 Address to Request Application PackageApplicants can find application forms, kits, or other materials needed to apply on www.grants.gov and SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “DRL FY23 Bringing Sri Lanka’s Expression Laws in-line with International Standards,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0010225.” Please contact the DRL point of contact listed in Section G if requesting reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities or for security reasons. Please note that reasonable accommodations do not include deadline extensions.D.2 Content and Form of Application SubmissionFor all application documents, please ensure:All documents are in English and all costs are in U.S. Dollars. If an original document within the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided (please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires that English is the official language of all award documents). If any document is provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is the controlling version;All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments;All documents are formatted to 8 1⁄2 x 11 paper; and,All documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins. Captions and footnotes may be 10-point Times New Roman font. Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit within one page width.D.2.1 Application RequirementsComplete applications must include the following:Completed and signed SF-424, SF-424A, and SF-424B forms. Please see SF-424 instructions in Section 2B of the PSI.Organizations that engage in lobbying the U.S. government, including Congress, or pay for another entity to lobby on their behalf, are also required to complete the SF-LLL “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” form (only if applicable). Please see SF-LLL guidance in Section 2B of the PSI.Cover Page (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that includes a table with the organization name, project title, target country/countries, project synopsis, and name and contact information for the application’s main point of contact. Please see Cover Page Section 2C of the PSI for a template and more details.Executive Summary (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that outlines project goals, objectives, activities, etc.The Executive Summary should include a brief section that explicitly states: (1) the problem statement addressed by the project, (2) research-based evidence justifying the unique project approach, and (3) quantifiable project outcomes and impacts.Table of Contents (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) listing all documents and attachments with page numbers.Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten (10) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please note the ten-page limit does not include the Cover Page, Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative, Audit, or NICRA. Applicants are encouraged to combine multiple documents into a single Word Document or PDF (i.e. Cover Page, Table of Contents, Executive Summary, and Proposal Narrative in one file). Please see Proposal Narrative Guidelines in Section 2F of the PSI for more details.The Proposal Narrative should demonstrate the applicant’s commitment to ensuring the participation of all people as a strategy for implementation. Please integrate inclusion strategies in all sections of the Proposal Narrative to enhance programmatic impact.Budget (preferably as an Excel workbook) that includes three (3) columns containing the request to DRL, any cost sharing contribution, and the total budget. A summary budget should also be included using the OMB-approved budget categories (see SF-424A as a sample) in a separate tab. Costs must be in U.S. Dollars. Detailed line-item budgets for sub-grantees should be included as additional tabs within the Excel workbook (if available at the time of submission).Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information.The programming approach should be dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.  Please include costs associated with this commitment in the Budget and Budget Narrative.Competitive proposals may include a summary budget for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance.Budget Narrative (preferably as a Word Document) that includes substantive explanations and justifications for each line item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and a description of all cost-share offered. Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information.Competitive proposals may include a summary budget narrative for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance.The organization’s most recent audit, if applicable. This should be a single audit, program-specific audit, or other audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). Please see Audit Section 2H of the PSI for more information.Logic Model (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Logic Model Section 2I of the PSI for more information.Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative (not to exceed four (4) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please see Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative Section 2J of the PSI for more information.As stated within the DRL Guide to Program Monitoring and Evaluation (p. 6): DRL strongly encourages applicants to consider whether their monitoring and evaluation systems are utilizing human rights-based approaches, applying a gender and equity lens, and/or include the participation of sub-grantees and project participants. Within the Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative, applicants should demonstrate their commitment to inclusive strategies and consider whether evaluation design, data collection, analysis, reporting and learning are conducted in an ethical and responsible way with all project participants (e.g. direct beneficiaries, sub-grantees). Applicants should still make adequate provisions to protect the privacy of human subjects when collecting data from individuals. For instance, when collecting data from project participants, consider whether your organization will have the necessary informed consent forms, confidentiality agreements, and data security protocols. Applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.Risk Analysis (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Risk Analysis Section 2K of the PSI for more information on this requirement, including Do No Harm principles and Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) policies/plans.Key Personnel (not to exceed two (2) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please include short bios that highlight relevant professional experience. Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission.Timeline (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet). The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout.Gender and Inclusion Analysis (not to exceed three (3) pages, preferably as a Word Document) that provides a concise analysis of relevant gender norms, equity and equality for underserved communities and marginalized populations, power relations, and conflict dynamics in target countries. Potential domains of analysis include institutional practices and barriers, cultural norms, gender roles, access to and control over assets and resources, and patterns of power and decision-making. Applicants should briefly explain how they have integrated findings from their analysis into project design and/or other proposal documents, including a plan for regularly reviewing and updating the gender and inclusion analysis with local partners/beneficiaries, and making any necessary adjustments to project implementation. A set of guiding questions can be found in Section 2L of the PSI.Security Plan addressing any issues involving in-person events and recruitment for said events, and safety for any online programs or communications, including independent IT security audits (to include a vulnerability assessment) of any proposed web application or platform. Organization’s Security Plan should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment. Costs may also be identified within the budget and budget narrative. Applicants are also encouraged to include contingency plans for in-person or online activities.Lessons Learned (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) from past programs (insert country or theme) that demonstrate how the implementer has safely operated and responded to programmatic challenges, learning from both successes and failures, in the operating environment.  To be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for “Proposal Narrative.”Psychosocial Assistance (to be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for “Proposal Narrative,” and into “Budget” and “Budget Narrative”). A section in the proposal, budget, and budget narrative to reflect appropriate resources and support for the psychosocial health of staff (i.e., activities can range from access to educational materials and training opportunities to counseling services to other contextually relevant support).References: For reference to international guidance, please see the following: Core Humanitarian Standard Commitment 8.9 (https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/files/files/CHS-Guidance-Notes-and-Indicators.pdf); and IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings Action Sheet 4.4 (http://www.who.int/mental_health/emergencies/guidelines_iasc_mental_health_psychosocial_june_2007.pdf).Applications that do not include the elements listed above will be deemed technically ineligible. D.2.2 Additional Application DocumentsStrong applications will also contain the following:Individual Letters of Support and/or Memorandum of Understanding. Letters of support and MOUs must be specific to the project implementation (e.g. from proposed partners or sub-award recipients) and will not count towards the page limit.Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), updated December 2022, on DRL’s website for detailed guidance on the documents above: https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/. For an application checklist and sample templates please see the Resources page on DRL’s website: https://www.state.gov/resources-for-programs-and-grants/. The sample templates provided on the DRL website are suggested, but not mandatory.DRL reserves the right to request additional documents not included in this NOFO. Additionally, to ensure that all applications receive a balanced evaluation, the DRL review panel will review from the first page of each section up to the page limit and no further.Note: If ultimately provided with a notification of non-binding intent to make a federal award, applicants typically have two to three weeks to provide additional information and documents requested in the notification of intent. The deadlines may vary in each notification of intent and applicants must adhere to the stated deadline in the notification of intent.D.2.3 Additional Information Requested For Those Receiving Notification of IntentSuccessful applicants must submit, after notification of intent to make a federal award, but prior to issuance of a federal award:Written responses and revised application documents addressing conditions and recommendations from the DRL review panel;A copy of the applicant’s latest NICRA as a PDF file, if the applicant has a NICRA and includes NICRA charges in the budget;A completed copy of the Department’s Financial Management Survey, if receiving DRL funding for the first time;Submission of required documents to register in the Payment Management System managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, if receiving DRL funding for the first time (unless an exemption is provided);Other requested information or documents included in the notification of intent to make a federal award or subsequent communications prior to issuance of a federal award;Applicants who submit their applications through Grants.gov will be required to create a SAMS Domestic account in order to accept the final award. Accounts must be logged into to every 60 days in order to maintain an active account.D.3 Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)All prime organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and an active registration with the SAM.gov before submitting an application. DRL may not review applications from or make awards to applicants that have not completed all applicable UEI and SAM.gov requirements. A UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards.Note: As of April 2022, a DUNS number is no longer required for federal assistance applications.The 2 CFR 200 requires that sub-grantees obtain a UEI number. Please note the UEI for sub-grantees is not required at the time of application but will be required before the award is processed and/or directed to a sub-grantee.Note: The process of obtaining or renewing a SAM.gov registration may take anywhere from 4-8 weeks. Please begin your registration as early as possible.Organizations based in the United States or that pay employees within the United States will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code, and a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov.Organizations based outside of the United States and that do not pay employees within the United States do not need an EIN from the IRS, but do need a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov. Please note that as of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket (“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov to seek guidance on how to do so.Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO NOT plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions: Step 1: Proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process. SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:Step 1: Apply for an NCAGE code by following the instructions on the NSPA NATO website linked below:NCAGE Homepage:https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/sc/CageList.aspxNCAGE Code Request Tool (NCRT):https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/Codification/CageTool/homeFor NCAGE help from within the United States, call +1 (888) 227-2423.For NCAGE help from outside the United States, call +1 (269) 961-7766.Or, email NCAGE@dlis.dla.mil for any problems in applying for an NCAGE code.Step 2: After receiving an NCAGE code, proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process. SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.All prime organizations must also continue to maintain active SAM.gov registration with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or application under consideration by a federal award agency. SAM.gov requires all entities to renew their registration once a year in order to maintain an active registration status in SAM.gov. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure it has an active registration in SAM.gov and to maintain that active registration. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements at the time of application, the applicant may be deemed technically ineligible to receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.Please refer to 2 CFR 25.200 for additional information.Note: SAM.gov is not the same as SAMS Domestic. It is free of charge to register in both systems, but the registration processes are different.Information is included on the SAM.gov website to help international registrations, including “Quick Start Guide for International Registrations” and “Helpful Hints.” Navigate to www.SAM.gov, click “HELP” in the top navigation bar, then click “Explore” and “New to SAM.gov?” for general information. Please note, guidance on SAM.gov and the guidance on GSA’s website about requirement for registering in SAM.gov is subject to change and is currently being updated. Applicants should review the website for the most up-to-date guidance.The attached “AQM Guidance for NCAGE-SAM.gov for Grant Applicants as of Dec. 2022” is a compilation of resources gathered by the Department’s Office of Acquisitions Management (AQM). Any content shown from SAM.gov is not owned by the Department of State. This guidance and instruction are to the best of our knowledge based at the time of posting this solicitation. Where guidance in these attachments differs from the SAM.gov website, SAM.gov prevails and the applicant is encouraged to seek and document responses provided by the SAM.gov help desk.D.3.1 ExemptionsAn exemption from these requirements may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if:An applicant’s identity must be protected due to potential endangerment of their mission, their organization’s status, their employees, or individuals being served by the applicant.For an applicant, if the federal awarding agency makes a determination that there are exigent circumstances that prohibit the applicant from receiving a UEI and completing SAM.gov registration prior to receiving a federal award. In these instances, federal awarding agencies must require the recipient to obtain a UEI and complete SAM.gov registration within 30 days of the federal award date.Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least two weeks prior to the deadline in the NOFO providing a justification of their request. Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted Grants Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review.Note: As of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.D.4 Submission Dates and TimesApplications are due no later than 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST), on April 22, 2024 on https://www.grants.gov/ or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “FY23 Bringing Sri Lanka’s Expression Laws in-line with International Standards,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0010225.” Grants.gov and SAMS Domestic automatically log the date and time an application submission is made, and the Department of State will use this information to determine whether an application has been submitted on time. Late applications are neither reviewed nor considered. Known system errors caused by Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) that are outside of the applicant’s control will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Applicants should not expect a notification upon DRL receiving their application.D.5 Funding RestrictionsPrior to issuing a federal award with a total amount of federal share greater than $250,000, the Department of State is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is found in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov (41 USC §2313). An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM.gov and comment on any information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov. The Department of State will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant&#8217;s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.206.DRL will not consider applications that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization. Please refer the link for Foreign Terrorist Organizations: https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/Project activities whose direct beneficiaries are foreign militaries or paramilitary groups or individuals will not be considered for DRL funding given purpose limitations on funding.In accordance with Department of State policy for terrorism, applicants are advised that successful passing of vetting to evaluate the risk that funds may benefit terrorists or their supporters is a condition of award. If chosen for an award, applicants will be asked to submit information required by DS Form 4184, Risk Analysis Information (attached to this solicitation) about their company and its principal personnel. Vetting information is also required for all sub-award performance on assistance awards identified by the Department of State as presenting a risk of terrorist financing. Vetting information may also be requested for project beneficiaries and participants. Failure to submit information when requested, or failure to pass vetting, may be grounds for rejecting your proposal prior to award.The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. Per 22 USC §2378d(a) (2017), “No assistance shall be furnished under this chapter  or the Arms Export Control Act  to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.” Restrictions may apply to any proposed assistance to police or other law enforcement. Among these, pursuant to section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), no assistance provided through this funding opportunity may be furnished to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country when there is credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. In accordance with the requirements of section 620M of the FAA, also known as the Leahy law, project beneficiaries or participants from a foreign government’s security forces may need to be vetted by the Department before the provision of any assistance. If a proposed grant or cooperative agreement will provide assistance to foreign security forces or personnel, compliance with the Leahy Law is required.U.S. foreign assistance for Burma or Burmese beneficiaries is subject to restrictions. This includes restrictions, pursuant to section 7043(a)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2020 (Div. G, P.L. 116-94)(SFOAA), on funds appropriated under title III of the act for assistance for Burma. Section 7043(a)(3) provides that such funds “may not be made available to any organization or entity controlled by the armed forces of Burma, or to any individual or organization that advocates violence against ethnic or religious groups or individuals in Burma, as determined by the Secretary of State.” In addition, funds cannot be made available to any individual or organization that has committed serious human rights abuse.Organizations should be cognizant of these restrictions when developing project proposals as these restrictions will require appropriate due diligence of program beneficiaries and collaboration with DRL to ensure compliance with these restrictions. Program beneficiaries subject to due diligence vetting will include any individuals or entities that are beneficiaries of foreign assistance funding or support. Due diligence vetting will include a review of open-source materials.Federal awards generally will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs; however, the Grants Officer may approve pre-award costs on a case-by-case basis. Generally, construction costs are not allowed under DRL awards. For additional information, please see the DRL Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for Applications: https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/.D.6 Application SubmissionAll application submissions must be made electronically via www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com). Both systems require registration by the applying organization. Please note that the Grants.gov registration process can take ten (10) business days or longer, even if all registration steps are completed in a timely manner.It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that it has an active registration in SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov. Applicants are required to document that the application has been received by SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov in its entirety. DRL bears no responsibility for disqualification that result from applicants not being registered before the due date, for system errors in either SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov, or other errors in the application process. Additionally, applicants must save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will not be accepted. Reasonable accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with disabilities or for security reasons. Applicants must follow all formatting instructions in the applicable NOFO and these instructions.DRL encourages organizations to submit applications during normal business hours (Monday – Friday, 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST)). If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted the appropriate help desk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g. if you have not received a response within 48 hours of contacting the help desk), you may contact the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO in Section G. The point of contact may assist in contacting the appropriate help desk.The Grants Officer will determine technical eligibility of all applications.SAMS Domestic Applications:Applicants using SAMS Domestic for the first time should complete their “New Organization Registration.” To register with SAMS Domestic, click “Login to https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com” and follow the “create an account” link.Organizations must remember to save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.SAMS Domestic Help Desk: For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com . Customer support is available 24/7.Grants.gov Applications:Applicants who do not submit applications via SAMS Domestic may submit via www.grants.gov.Please be advised that completing all the necessary registration steps for obtaining a username and password from Grants.gov can take ten (10) business days or longer.Please refer to the Grants.gov website for definitions of various &#8220;application statuses&#8221; 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. Validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days. Additionally, organizations must remember to save a screenshot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Grants.gov Helpdesk: For assistance with Grants.gov, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov. The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.See https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/ for a list of federal holidays.E. Application Review InformationE.1 Proposal Review CriteriaThe DRL review panel will evaluate each application individually against the following criteria, listed below in order of importance, and not against competing applications. Please use the below criteria as a reference, but do not structure your application according to the sub-sections.Quality of Project IdeaApplications should be responsive to the program framework and policy objectives identified in the NOFO, appropriate in the country/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to DRL’s mission of promoting human rights and democracy. Projects should have the potential to have an immediate impact leading to long-term, sustainable reforms. DRL prefers new approaches that do not duplicate efforts by other entities. This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way. In countries where similar activities are already taking place, an explanation should be provided as to how new activities will not duplicate or merely add to existing activities and how these efforts will be coordinated. Proposals that promote creative approaches to recognized ongoing challenges are highly encouraged. DRL prioritizes project proposals with inclusive approaches for advancing these rights.Project Planning/Ability to Achieve ObjectivesA strong application will include a clear articulation of how the proposed project activities contribute to the overall project objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed. A comprehensive monthly work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization. Objectives should be ambitious yet measurable, results-focused and achievable in a reasonable timeframe. A complete application must include a Logic Model to demonstrate how the project activities will have an impact on its proposed objectives. The Logic Model should match the objectives, outcomes, key activities, and outputs described in the narrative. Applications should address how the project will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate.If local partners have been identified, DRL strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners. Additionally, applicants should describe the division of labor among the direct applicant and any local partners. If applicable, applications should identify target geographic areas for activities, target participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and the specific roles of sub-awardees, among other pertinent details.DRL recognizes that all programs have some level of risk due to internal/external variables that have the potential to adversely affect a program. Risk management should address how the project design incorporates the identification, assessment, and management of key risk factors. DRL will review the Risk Analysis based on the organization’s ability to identify risks that could have an impact on the overall program as well as how the organization will manage these risks.Institution’s Record and CapacityDRL will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Applications should demonstrate an institutional record of successful democracy and human rights programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past grants. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the project&#8217;s objectives. Projects should have potential for continued funding beyond DRL resources.Addressing Barriers to Equal ParticipationDRL strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of all persons. As the U.S. government’s lead bureau dedicated to promoting democratic governance, DRL requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.  Discrimination, violence, inequity, and inequality targeting any members of society undermines collective security and threatens democracy. DRL prioritizes inclusive and integrated program models that assess and address the barriers to access for individuals and groups based on their race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. The proposal should also demonstrate how the project will further engagement in underserved communities and with individuals from underserved communities. Applicants should describe how programming will impact all of its beneficiaries, including support for underserved and underrepresented communities.  This approach should be an integral part of both the concept and explicit design, and implementation of all proposed project activities, objectives, and monitoring. Strong proposals will provide specific analysis, measures, and corresponding targets as appropriate.  Stakeholders shall identify the difference between opportunities and barriers to access, and design projects accordingly to not perpetuate these inequalities, but rather enhance programmatic impact by including all people in society. The goal of this approach is to bring communities and those in power together in support of more stable and secure societies.Cost Effectiveness DRL strongly encourages applicants to clearly demonstrate project cost-effectiveness in their application, including examples of leveraging institutional and other resources. However, cost-sharing or other examples of leveraging other resources are not required. Inclusion of cost-sharing in the budget does not result in additional points awarded during the review process. Budgets should have low and/or reasonable overhead and administration costs, and applicants should provide clear explanations and justifications for these costs in relation to the work involved. All budget items should be clearly explained and justified to demonstrate necessity, appropriateness, and connection to the project objectives.Please note: If cost share is included in the budget, the recipient must maintain written records to support all allowable costs that are claimed as its contribution to cost share, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. In the event the recipient does not meet the minimum amount of cost-sharing as stipulated in the recipient’s budget, DRL’s contribution may be reduced in proportion to the recipient’s contribution.Multiplier Effect/SustainabilityApplications should clearly delineate how elements of the project will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant. A good multiplier effect will have an impact beyond the direct beneficiaries of the grant (e.g. participants trained under a grant go on to train other people; workshop participants use skills from a workshop to enhance a national level election that affects the entire populace). A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating continuing impact beyond the life of a project or garnering other donor support after DRL funding ceases.Project Monitoring and EvaluationComplete applications will include a detailed M&amp;E Narrative, which detail how the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated. Incorporating well-designed monitoring and evaluation processes into a project is an efficient method for documenting the change (intended and unintended) that a project seeks. Applications should demonstrate the capacity to provide objectives with measurable outputs and outcomes.The quality of the M&amp;E sections will be judged on the narrative explaining how both monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for those related activities. The M&amp;E Narrative should explain how evaluation(s), internal or external, will be incorporated into the project implementation plan or how the project will be systematically assessed in the absence of one. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the narrative.Note: Applicants are no longer required to submit a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in their proposals. However, applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.The output and outcome-based performance indicators should not only be separated by project objectives but also should match the objectives, outcomes, and outputs detailed in the Logic Model and Proposal Narrative. Performance indicators should be clearly defined (i.e., explained how the indicators will be measured and reported) either within the table or with a separate Performance Indicator Reference Sheet (PIRS). For each performance indicator, the table should also include baselines and quarterly and cumulative targets, data collection tools, data sources, types of data disaggregation, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation. There should also be metrics to capture how project activities target those who face discrimination due to their religion, gender, disabilities, ethnicity or sexual orientation and gender identity, where applicable. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the plan.E.2 Review and Selection ProcessDRL strives to ensure that each application receives a balanced evaluation by a DRL review panel. AQM will determine technical eligibility for all applications. All technically eligible applications for a given NOFO are reviewed against the same seven criteria, which include quality of project idea, project planning/ability to achieve objectives, institutional record and capacity, inclusive programming, cost effectiveness, multiplier effect/sustainability, and project monitoring and evaluation.Additionally, the DRL review panel will evaluate how the application addresses the NOFO request, U.S. foreign policy goals, and the priority needs of DRL overall. DRL may also take into consideration the balance of the current portfolio of active projects, including geographic or thematic diversity, if needed.In most cases, the DRL review panel includes representatives from DRL, the appropriate Department of State regional bureau (to include feedback from U.S. embassies), and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (to include feedback from USAID missions). In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that are in a public-private partnership with DRL. At the end of the panel’s discussion about an application, the review panel votes on whether to recommend the application for approval by the DRL Assistant Secretary. If more applications are recommended for approval than DRL can ultimately fund, the review panel will rank the recommended applications in priority order for consideration by the DRL Assistant Secretary. The Grants Officer Representative (GOR) for the eventual award does not vote on the panel. All panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest agreements.DRL review panels may provide conditions and recommendations on applications to enhance the proposed project, which must be addressed by the applicant before further consideration of the award. To ensure effective use of DRL funds, conditions or recommendations may include requests to increase, decrease, clarify, and/or justify costs and project activities.F. Federal Award Administration InformationF.1 Federal Award NoticesDRL will provide a separate notification to applicants on the result of their applications. Successful applicants will receive a letter electronically via email requesting that the applicant respond to review panel conditions and recommendations. This notification is not an authorization to begin activities and does not constitute formal approval or a funding commitment.Final approval is contingent on the applicant successfully responding to the review panel’s conditions and recommendations; being registered in required systems, including the U.S. government’s Payment Management System (PMS), unless an exemption is provided; and completing and providing any additional documentation requested by DRL or AQM. Final approval is also contingent on Congressional Notification requirements being met and final review and approval by the Department’s warranted Grants Officer.The notice of Federal award signed by the Department’s warranted Grants Officers is the sole authorizing document. If awarded, the notice of Federal award will be provided to the applicant’s designated Authorizing Official via SAMS Domestic to be electronically counter-signed in the system.F.2 Administrative and National Policy and Legal RequirementsDRL requires all recipients of foreign assistance funding to comply with all applicable Department and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to the following:The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR Chapter 200 (Sub-Chapters A through F) shall apply to all non-Federal entities, except for assistance awards to Individuals and Foreign Public Entities.  Sub-Chapters A through E shall apply to all foreign organizations, and Sub-Chapters A through D shall apply to all U.S. and foreign for-profit entities. The applicant/recipient of the award and any sub-recipient under the award must comply with all applicable terms and conditions, in addition to the assurance and certifications made part of the Notice of Award.  The Department’s Standard Terms and Conditions can be viewed at https://www.state.gov/about-us-office-of-the-procurement-executive/.Additionally, DRL supports implementation of the National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality; the Women Peace and Security (WPS) Act of 2017, which highlights the U.S. commitment to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution; and the Department of State WPS Implementation Plan. For additional information, please refer to the following link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1141.Due to the determination made under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) for funds obligated during FY 2023, assistance that benefits the governments of the following countries may be subject to a restriction under the TVPA.  The Department of State determines on a case-by-case basis what constitutes assistance to a government; the general principles listed below apply.Assistance to the government includes:All branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) at all levels (national, regional, local);Public schools, universities, hospitals, and state-owned enterprises, as well as government employees;Cash, training, equipment, services, or other assistance provided directly to the government, assistance provided to an NGO or other implementer for the benefit of the government, and assistance to government employees.Additional requirements may be included depending on the content of the program.F.3 ReportingApplicants should be aware of the post-award reporting requirements for federal assistance awards as reflected in 2 CFR 200 Appendix XII &#8211; Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters. DRL awards require that all reports (financial and progress) are uploaded to the federal award file in SAMS Domestic on a quarterly basis. The Federal Financial Report (FFR or SF-425) is the required form for financial reports and must be submitted in PMS, and a copy of the report submitted in PMS then uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic. Progress reports uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic must include a narrative as described below as well as Program Indicators (or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer), including standard (F) framework indicators and DRL framework indicators. F and DRL framework indicators will be reviewed and negotiated during the final stages of issuing an award on a project-by-project basis.Narrative progress reports should reflect the focus on measuring the project’s progress on the overarching objectives and should be compiled according to the objectives, outcomes, and outputs as outlined in the award’s Scope of Work (SOW) and in the Monitoring &amp; Evaluation Narrative. An assessment of the overall project’s achievements should be included in each progress report. Where relevant, progress reports should include the following sections:Relevant contextual information (limited);Explanation and evaluation of significant activities of the reporting period and how the activities reflect progress toward achieving objectives, including meeting benchmarks/targets as set in the approved M&amp;E Plan. In addition, attach the M&amp;E Plan, comparing the target and actual numbers for the indicators;Any qualitative impact or success stories from the project, when possible;Copy of baseline, mid-term, and/or final evaluation report(s) conducted by an external evaluator; if applicable;Relevant supporting documentation or products related to the project activities (such as articles, meeting lists and agendas, participant surveys, photos, manuals, etc.) as separate attachments;Description of how the recipient is pursuing sustainability, including looking for sources of follow-on funding;Any problems/challenges in implementing the project and a corrective action plan with an updated timeline of activities;Reasons why established goals were not met;Data for the required F and/or DRL framework indicator(s) for the quarter as well as aggregate data by fiscal year;Program Indicators or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer;Proposed activities for the next quarter; and,Additional pertinent information, including analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs, if applicable.Foreign Assistance Data Review: As required by Congress, the Department of State must make progress in its efforts to improve tracking and reporting of foreign assistance data through the Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR). The FADR requires tracking of foreign assistance activity data from budgeting, planning, and allocation through obligation and disbursement. Successful applicants will be required to report and draw down federal funding based on the appropriate FADR Data Elements, indicated within their award documentation. In cases of more than one FADR Data Element, typically program or sector and/or regions or country, the successful applicant will be required to maintain separate accounting records.A final narrative and financial report must also be submitted within 120 days after the expiration of the award.Please note: Delays in reporting may result in delays of payment approvals and failure to provide required reports may jeopardize the recipient&#8217;s’ ability to receive future U.S. government funds. DRL reserves the right to request any additional programmatic and/or financial project information during the award period.G. Contact InformationFor technical submission questions related to this NOFO, please contact drl-sca-programinfo@state.govFor assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://afsitsm.service-now.com/ilms/home. Customer support is available 24/7.Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA). If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the helpdesk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.For assistance with Grants.gov accounts and technical issues related to using the system, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov. The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays. For a list of federal holidays visit:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/Except for technical submission questions, during the NOFO period U.S. Department of State staff in Washington and overseas shall not discuss this competition with applicants until the entire proposal review process has been completed and rejection and approval letters have been transmitted.H. Other InformationApplicants should be aware that DRL understands that some information contained in applications may be considered sensitive or proprietary and will make appropriate efforts to protect such information. However, applicants are advised that DRL cannot guarantee that such information will not be disclosed, including pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or other similar statutes.The information in this NOFO and “Proposal Submission Instructions for Applications” is binding and may not be modified by any DRL representative. Explanatory information provided by DRL that contradicts this language will not be binding. Issuance of the NOFO and negotiation of applications does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government. DRL reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets.This NOFO will appear on www.grants.gov, SAMS Domestic, and DRL’s website https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/.Background Information on DRL and General DRL FundingDRL has the mission of promoting democracy and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms globally. DRL supports projects designed through an evidence-based framework that empower local civil society partners to promote and defend democracy globally, including efforts to counter authoritarianism, promote human rights, and meaningfully address diversity, equity, and inclusion as a core element of good governance. DRL typically focuses its work in countries facing human rights violations and abuses, where democracy and human rights defenders are under pressure, and where governance infrastructure is undemocratic, in transition, or at risk of backsliding. Additional background information on DRL and its efforts can be found on https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/.
- Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Verma’s Travel to India, Maldives, and Sri Lanka Office of the SpokespersonDeputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard R. Verma will travel to India, Maldives, and Sri Lanka on February 18-23 to strengthen the United States’ cooperation with each of these key Indo-Pacific partners.&nbsp; Shortly following the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy, his trip will reaffirm the United States’ enduring commitment to a free, open, secure, and prosperous region.In New Delhi, India, Deputy Secretary Verma will meet with senior government officials, business leaders, and entrepreneurs to advance the U.S.-Indian global strategic partnership on a full range of issues, including economic development, security, and technology.From India, Deputy Secretary Verma will travel to Malé, Maldives, to meet with senior officials and advance shared priorities in increasing economic cooperation and promoting maritime security.&nbsp; The Deputy Secretary will also tour the planned office space for a new U.S. Embassy in Malé, which will help further increase people-to-people ties between the United States and Maldives.Deputy Secretary Verma will conclude his trip in Colombo, Sri Lanka.&nbsp; His meetings with senior officials will support U.S.-Sri Lankan defense and maritime security cooperation. &nbsp;The Deputy Secretary will visit the Port of Colombo&#8217;s West Container Terminal, where the United States is supporting Sri Lanka&#8217;s ongoing economic recovery through $553 million in financing to transform Colombo into a regional shipping hub.&nbsp; Finally, he will meet with civil society leaders to hear their perspective on democratic governance in Sri Lanka and with government officials to voice U.S. support for the protection of free speech and open discourse.						Tags																					Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																								Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources																								India																								Maldives																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Official International Travel																															Sri Lanka
- Under Secretary Elizabeth M. Allen’s Travel to Jordan, Sri Lanka, and India Office of the SpokespersonUnder Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Liz Allen is on travel to Jordan, Sri Lanka, and India from February 12-22. The visit underscores the United States’ unwavering commitment to reinforcing and expanding partnerships and alliances. The trip highlights the core of U.S. foreign policy and public diplomacy initiatives: fostering freedom of expression, economic empowerment, and global collaboration.In Jordan, Under Secretary Allen engaged with alumni of U.S. public diplomacy programs and civil society leaders, gaining valuable insights into regional perspectives. She explored the transformative impact of English Language programs on Jordanian youth, which equip them with essential skills for the labor market. She also met with State Department public affairs professionals and Government of Jordan officials to discuss integrated, innovative strategic communications as a tool of national security.After Jordan, Under Secretary Allen will travel to Colombo, Sri Lanka to reaffirm U.S. support for Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and to promote a free and open Indo-Pacific. Her agenda includes fostering dialogue on freedom of expression and democratic values with diverse groups of stakeholders, including journalists, civil society members, government officials, and the Embassy’s Youth Forum. Her engagements with the Sri Lanka Press Institute, U.S. public diplomacy program alumni, and local content creators will emphasize the critical role of preserving diverse voices for a stable and inclusive Sri Lanka. Additionally, she will meet with representatives from Sri Lanka’s multifaith community to underscore the importance of societal inclusivity.Finally, in Mumbai, India, Under Secretary Allen will focus on increasing women’s participation in the formal economic sector. Her discussions with business leaders and U.S. government-funded program alumni will support the United States’ strategic and sustained collaboration with the U.S.-Indian diaspora, corporations, academia, and the business sector to advance women’s economic empowerment. Her participation in a panel discussion at the University of Mumbai will shed light on the dynamic U.S.-India partnership, exploring how bilateral cooperation can yield substantial benefits for both nations and the wider region in the coming decade.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Allen on Twitter/X: @UnderSecPD.
- FY23 J/IRF Supporting Religious and Cultural Heritage in Sri Lanka Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborThis is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0010241.Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 19.345Type of Solicitation: Open CompetitionApplication Deadline:  11:59 PM EST on April 15, 2024Total Funding Floor: $700,000Total Funding Ceiling: $700,000Anticipated Number of Awards: 1-2Type of Award: Grant or cooperative agreementPeriod of Performance: minimum of 24 monthsAnticipated Time to Award, Pending Availability of Funds: 6 –9 months after NOFO posted.A. Project DescriptionThe U.S. Department of State, Office of International Religious (J/IRF) announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for projects that support freedom of religion or belief through the protection of religious and cultural heritage sites in Sri Lanka. This program cannot fund the construction, repair, or maintenance of religious properties, artifacts, or cultural heritage sites.Cultural heritage is often important to members of a society for various reasons. In Sri Lanka, recent instances of archeological-religious disputes involving heritage sites have hindered opportunities for collaboration to preserve this shared cultural heritage and foster collaboration and mutual respect across religious communities. There is concern that these disputes drive ethnoreligious tensions and delay post-war reconciliation. Focusing on historical cultural traditions and leveraging a shared commitment to preserving such spaces can increase mutual respect in these communities.Program outcomes may include but are not limited to:Multi-faith engagement and dialogue lead members of diverse communities to coordinate on and engage in collective action to address themes of mutual concern;Diverse community actors and networks, including members of historically marginalized groups, take collective action to promote and protect the rights of all religious communities to have places of worship;Civil society-driven processes or mechanisms address the concerns and interests of community members, including members of minority religions and belief communities;Increased awareness and understanding among government officials and security, law enforcement, and legal actors of the value and importance of human rights, mutual respect, and inclusion for all, regardless of one’s religion or beliefs;Government agencies, law enforcement, and political leaders are increasingly responsive to domestic and international advocacy to protect and preserve religious and cultural and heritage sites;Government stakeholders build working relationships with rights advocates and community actors, including those from minority religions, belief or non-belief.For the purposes of this program, participants should include not only those in traditional, executive roles, but also community members from diverse demographic backgrounds who have influence within civil society, including a religious community or sub-community, such as a community organizer or youth leader. Religious communities should also be broadly defined to include those of legally recognized faiths, legally unrecognized traditions, religious and ethnic minorities, and those of no faith tradition.Program activities may include but are not limited to:Convening multi-stakeholder policy dialogues on religious freedom with civil society, legal experts, government officials, faith-based organizations, and believers and non-believers with clear connection to actions that seek to promote the importance of protection and preservation of religious and cultural heritage sites as it relates to religious freedom;Advocating with the central government as well as the Department of Archeology, Ministry of Buddha Sasana, and Religious and Cultural Affairs on behalf of and inclusion of faith groups in decision-making processes that impact religious freedom and incorporate their feedback into policy and practice in a timely manner;Training to build capacity among religious and ethnic communities so they can both map and utilize financial, organizational, governmental, and other resources to engage international entities on a shared goal to preserve and/or stabilize movable and immovable, tangible or intangible cultural heritage;Providing training on documentation of religious/cultural heritage preservation and effective outreach methods relating to awareness of shared cultural heritage to civil society organizations, interfaith actors or organizations, youth groups, etc.;Engaging policy makers at local and national levels, as well as international organizations such as UNESCO, to enlist their support for protecting cultural heritage and artifacts important to religious and ethnic communities;Building relationships between government and community members (including religious groups) to promote cooperation and mutual respect;Fostering cooperation and communal dialogue among a broad range of stakeholders around the shared importance of protecting shared cultural heritage that is important to different religious and ethnic communities.J/IRF adheres to the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor’s (DRL) procurement procedures for their awards.All programs should aim to have impact that leads to reforms and have the potential for sustainability beyond J/IRF’s resources.&nbsp; J/IRF’s preference is to avoid duplicating past efforts by supporting new and creative approaches.&nbsp; This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.&nbsp;J/IRF is committed to advancing equity and support for underserved and underrepresented communities. In accordance with the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Underserved Communities, programs should implement strategies for integration and inclusion of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries that can bring perspectives based on their religion, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, national origin, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, pregnancy, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.&nbsp; Programs should be demand-driven and locally led to the extent possible.&nbsp;J/IRF requires all programs to be non-discriminatory and expects implementers to include strategies for nondiscrimination of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries based on race, color, religion, sex,&nbsp;gender identity,&nbsp;gender expression, sex characteristics,&nbsp;sexual orientation,&nbsp;pregnancy, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.&nbsp; Where appropriate, competitive proposals may include:Opportunities for beneficiaries to apply their new knowledge and skills in practical efforts;Solicitation of feedback and suggestions from beneficiaries when developing activities in order to strengthen the sustainability of programs and participant ownership of project outcomes;Input from participants on sustainability plans and systematic review of the plans throughout the life of the project, with adjustments made as necessary;Joint identification and definition of key concepts with relevant stakeholders and stakeholder input into project activities;Systematic follow-up with beneficiaries at specific intervals after the completion of activities to track how beneficiaries are retaining new knowledge as well as applying their new skills.Activities that are not typically allowed include, but are not limited to:The provision of humanitarian assistance;English language instruction;Development of high-tech computer or communications software and/or hardware;Purely academic exchanges or fellowships;External exchanges or fellowships lasting longer than six months;Off-shore activities that are not clearly linked to in-country initiatives and impact or are not necessary per security concerns;Theoretical explorations of human rights or democracy issues, including projects aimed primarily at research and evaluation that do not incorporate training or capacity-building for local civil society;Micro-loans or similar small business development initiatives;Initiatives directed towards a diaspora community rather than current residents of targeted countries.This notice is subject to availability of funding.B. Federal Award InformationPrimary organizations can submit 1 application in response to the NOFO.The U.S. government may: (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept other than the lowest cost application, (c) accept more than one application, and (d) waive irregularities in applications received.The U.S. government may make award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions or negotiations. Therefore, each initial application should contain the applicant&#8217;s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. The U.S. government reserves the right (though it is under no obligation to do so), however, to enter into discussions with one or more applicants in order to obtain clarifications, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the project description, budget, or other aspects of an application.J/IRF anticipates awarding either a grant or cooperative agreement depending on the needs and risk factors of the program. The final determination on award mechanism will be made by the Grants Officer. The distinction between grants and cooperative agreements revolves around the existence of “substantial involvement.” Cooperative agreements require greater Federal government participation in the project. If a cooperative agreement is awarded, J/IRF will undertake reasonable and programmatically necessary substantial involvement. Examples of substantial involvement can include, but are not limited to:Active participation or collaboration with the recipient in the implementation of the award;Review and approval of one stage of work before another can begin;Review and approval of substantive provisions of proposed sub-awards or contracts beyond existing Federal policy;Approval of the recipient’s plan of work prior to the award.The authority for this funding opportunity is found in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA).To maximize the impact and sustainability of the award(s) that result from this NOFO, J/IRF retains the right to execute non-competitive continuation amendment(s). The total duration of any award, including potential non-competitive continuation amendments, shall not exceed 54 months, or four and a half years. Any non-competitive continuation is contingent on performance and pending availability of funds. A non-competitive continuation is not guaranteed, and the Department of State reserves the right to exercise or not to exercise this option.C. Eligibility InformationFor application information, please see the proposal submission instructions (PSI), updated December 2022 on our website.C.1 Eligible ApplicantsJ/IRF welcomes applications from U.S.-based and foreign-based non-profit organizations/nongovernmental organizations (NGO) and public international organizations; private, public, or state institutions of higher education; and for-profit organizations or businesses. J/IRF’s preference is to work with non-profit entities; however, there may be some occasions when a for-profit entity is best suited.Applications submitted by for-profit entities may be subject to additional review following the panel selection process. Additionally, the Department of State prohibits profit to for-profit or commercial organizations under its assistance awards. Profit is defined as any amount in excess of allowable direct and indirect costs. The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 30, Cost Accounting Standards Administration, and 48 CFR 31 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.Please see 2 CFR 200.307 for regulations regarding program income.C.2 Cost Sharing or MatchingProviding cost sharing, matching, or cost participation is not an eligibility factor or requirement for this NOFO and providing cost share will not result in a more favorable competitive ranking. Per 2 CFR 200.306, budget line items that are proposed for cost share must be allowable per 2 CFR 200, Subpart E—Cost Principles.C.3 OtherApplicants should have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with thematic or in-country partners, entities, and relevant stakeholders, including private sector partners and NGOs, and have demonstrable experience in administering successful and preferably similar projects. J/IRF encourages applications from foreign-based NGOs headquartered in the geographic regions/countries relevant to this NOFO. Applicants may form consortia in order to bring together organizations with varied expertise to propose a comprehensive program in one proposal. However, one organization should be designated in the proposal as the lead applicant, with the other members designated as sub-award partners. J/IRF reserves the right to request additional background information on applicants that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards, and these applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis.J/IRF is committed to an anti-discrimination policy in all of its programs and activities. J/IRF welcomes applications irrespective of race, ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or other status. J/IRF seeks applications that demonstrate&nbsp;that the recipient does not discriminate against any beneficiaries in implementation of a potential award, such as, but not limited to, by withholding, adversely impacting, or denying equitable access to the benefits provided through this award&nbsp;on the basis of&nbsp;any factor not expressly stated in the award.&nbsp; This includes, for example, race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity,&nbsp;gender expression, sex characteristics,&nbsp;sexual orientation, and pregnancy),&nbsp;national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.&nbsp; The recipient&nbsp;should&nbsp;insert this provision, including this paragraph, in all sub-grants and contracts under a potential award.Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (www.sam.gov) and/or has a current debt to the U.S. government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR,1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR,1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award. All applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their application.D. Application and Submission InformationD.1 Address to Request Application PackageApplicants can find application forms, kits, or other materials needed to apply on www.grants.gov and SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “FY23 J/IRF Supporting Religious and Cultural Heritage in Sri Lanka,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0010241.” Please contact the J/IRF point of contact listed in Section G if requesting reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities or for security reasons. Please note that reasonable accommodations do not include deadline extensions.D.2 Content and Form of Application SubmissionFor all application documents, please ensure:All documents are in English and all costs are in U.S. Dollars. If an original document within the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided (please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires that English is the official language of all award documents). If any document is provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is the controlling version;All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments;All documents are formatted to 8 1⁄2 x 11 paper; and,All documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins. Captions and footnotes may be 10-point Times New Roman font. Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit within one page width.D.2.1 Application RequirementsComplete applications must include the following:Completed and signed SF-424, SF-424A, and SF-424B forms. Please see SF-424 instructions in Section 2B of the PSI. Organizations that engage in lobbying the U.S. government, including Congress, or pay for another entity to lobby on their behalf, are also required to complete the SF-LLL “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” form (only if applicable). Please see SF-LLL guidance in Section 2B of the PSI. Cover Page (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that includes a table with the organization name, project title, target country/countries, project synopsis, and name and contact information for the application’s main point of contact. Please see Cover Page Section 2C of the PSI for a template and more details. Executive Summary (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that outlines project goals, objectives, activities, etc.&nbsp;The Executive Summary should include a brief section that explicitly states: (1) the problem statement addressed by the project, (2) research-based evidence justifying the unique project approach, and (3) quantifiable project outcomes and impacts.Table of Contents (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) listing all documents and attachments with page numbers. Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten (10) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please note the ten-page limit does not include the Cover Page, Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative, Audit, or NICRA. Applicants are encouraged to combine multiple documents into a single Word Document or PDF (i.e., Cover Page, Table of Contents, Executive Summary, and Proposal Narrative in one file). Please see Proposal Narrative Guidelines in Section 2F of the PSI for more details.&nbsp;The Proposal Narrative should demonstrate the applicant’s commitment to ensuring the participation of all people as a strategy for implementation. Please integrate inclusion strategies in all sections of the Proposal Narrative to enhance programmatic impact.Budget (preferably as an Excel workbook) that includes three (3) columns containing the request to J/IRF, any cost sharing contribution, and the total budget. A summary budget should also be included using the OMB-approved budget categories (see SF-424A as a sample) in a separate tab. Costs must be in U.S. Dollars. Detailed line-item budgets for sub-grantees should be included as additional tabs within the Excel workbook (if available at the time of submission). Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information. The programming approach should be dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.&nbsp; Please include costs associated with this commitment in the Budget and Budget Narrative.Budget Narrative (preferably as a Word Document) that includes substantive explanations and justifications for each line item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and a description of all cost-share offered. Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information.The organization’s most recent audit, if applicable. This should be a single audit, program-specific audit, or other audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). Please see Audit Section 2H of the PSI for more information. Logic Model (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Logic Model Section 2I of the PSI for more information. Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative (not to exceed four (4) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please see Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative Section 2J of the PSI for more information.&nbsp;As stated within the DRL Guide to Program Monitoring and Evaluation (p. 6): J/IRF strongly encourages applicants to consider whether their monitoring and evaluation systems are utilizing human rights-based approaches, applying a gender and equity lens, and/or include the participation of sub-grantees and project participants. Within the Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative, applicants should demonstrate their commitment to inclusive strategies and consider whether evaluation design, data collection, analysis, reporting and learning are conducted in an ethical and responsible way with all project participants (e.g. direct beneficiaries, sub-grantees). Applicants should still make adequate provisions to protect the privacy of human subjects when collecting data from individuals. For instance, when collecting data from project participants, consider whether your organization will have the necessary informed consent forms, confidentiality agreements, and data security protocols. Applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, J/IRF will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.Risk Analysis (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Risk Analysis Section 2K of the PSI for more information on this requirement, including Do No Harm principles and Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) policies/plans. Key Personnel (not to exceed two (2) pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please include short bios that highlight relevant professional experience. Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission. Timeline (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet). The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout. Gender and Inclusion Analysis (not to exceed three (3) pages, preferably as a Word Document) that provides a concise analysis of relevant gender norms, equity and equality for underserved communities and marginalized populations, power relations, and conflict dynamics in target countries. Potential domains of analysis include institutional practices and barriers, cultural norms, gender roles, access to and control over assets and resources, and patterns of power and decision-making. Applicants should briefly explain how they have integrated findings from their analysis into project design and/or other proposal documents, including a plan for regularly reviewing and updating the gender and inclusion analysis with local partners/beneficiaries, and making any necessary adjustments to project implementation. A set of guiding questions can be found in Section 2L of the PSI.Security Plan addressing any issues involving in-person events and recruitment for said events, and safety for any online programs or communications, including independent IT security audits (to include a vulnerability assessment) of any proposed web application or platform. Organization’s Security Plan should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment. Costs may also be identified within the budget and budget narrative. Applicants are also encouraged to include contingency plans for in-person or online activities.Applications that do not include the elements listed above will be deemed technically ineligible. D.2.2 Additional Application DocumentsStrong applications will also contain the following:Individual Letters of Support and/or Memorandum of Understanding. Letters of support and MOUs must be specific to the project implementation (e.g., from proposed partners or sub-award recipients) and will not count towards the page limit.Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), updated December 2023, on DRL’s website for detailed guidance on the documents above: https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/. For an application checklist and sample templates please see the Resources page on DRL’s website: https://www.state.gov/resources-for-programs-and-grants/. The sample templates provided on the DRL website are suggested, but not mandatory.J/IRF reserves the right to request additional documents not included in this NOFO. Additionally, to ensure that all applications receive a balanced evaluation, the J/IRF review panel will review from the first page of each section up to the page limit and no further.Note: If ultimately provided with a notification of non-binding intent to make a federal award, applicants typically have two to three weeks to provide additional information and documents requested in the notification of intent. The deadlines may vary in each notification of intent and applicants must adhere to the stated deadline in the notification of intent.D.2.3 Additional Information Requested For Those Receiving Notification of IntentSuccessful applicants must submit, after notification of intent to make a federal award, but prior to issuance of a federal award:Written responses and revised application documents addressing conditions and recommendations from the J/IRF review panel;A copy of the applicant’s latest NICRA as a PDF file, if the applicant has a NICRA and includes NICRA charges in the budget;A completed copy of the Department’s Financial Management Survey, if receiving DRL or J/IRF funding for the first time;Submission of required documents to register in the Payment Management System managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, if receiving DRL or J/IRF funding for the first time (unless an exemption is provided);Other requested information or documents included in the notification of intent to make a federal award or subsequent communications prior to issuance of a federal award;Applicants who submit their applications through Grants.gov will be required to create a SAMS Domestic account in order to accept the final award. Accounts must be logged into to every 60 days in order to maintain an active account.D.3 Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)All prime organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and an active registration with the SAM.gov before submitting an application. J/IRF may not review applications from or make awards to applicants that have not completed all applicable UEI and SAM.gov requirements. A UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards.Note: As of April 2022, a DUNS number is no longer required for federal assistance applications.The 2 CFR 200 requires that sub-grantees obtain a UEI number. Please note the UEI for sub-grantees is not required at the time of application but will be required before the award is processed and/or directed to a sub-grantee.Note: The process of obtaining or renewing a SAM.gov registration may take anywhere from 4-8 weeks. Please begin your registration as early as possible.Organizations based in the United States or that pay employees within the United States will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov. Please note that as of February 2023, organizations based in the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket (“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov using the following language: “I do not intend to seek financial assistance from the Department of Defense. I do not wish to obtain a CAGE code. I understand that I will need to submit my registration after this incident is resolved in order to have my registration activated.”Organizations based outside of the United States and that do not pay employees within the United States do not need an EIN from the IRS, but do need a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov. Please note that as of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket (“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov using the following language: “I do not intend to seek financial assistance from the Department of Defense. I do not wish to obtain an NCAGE code. I understand that I will need to submit my registration after this incident is resolved in order to have my registration activated.”Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO NOT plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:&nbsp;Step 1: Proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process. SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.&nbsp;Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:Step 1: Apply for an NCAGE code&nbsp;by following the instructions on the NSPA NATO website linked below:&nbsp;&nbsp;NCAGE Homepage:&nbsp;https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/sc/CageList.aspx&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;NCAGE Code Request Tool (NCRT):&nbsp;&nbsp;https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/Codification/CageTool/home&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;For NCAGE help from within the United States, call +1 (888) 227-2423.&nbsp;&nbsp;For NCAGE help from outside the United States, call +1 (269) 961-7766.&nbsp;&nbsp;Or, email NCAGE@dlis.dla.mil for any problems in applying for an NCAGE code.&nbsp;&nbsp;Step 2: After receiving an NCAGE code, proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process. SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.&nbsp;All prime organizations must also continue to maintain active SAM.gov registration with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or application under consideration by a federal award agency. SAM.gov requires all entities to renew their registration once a year in order to maintain an active registration status in SAM.gov. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure it has an active registration in SAM.gov and to maintain that active registration. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements at the time of application, the applicant may be deemed technically ineligible to receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.Please refer to 2 CFR 25.200 for additional information.Note: SAM.gov is not the same as SAMS Domestic. It is free of charge to register in both systems, but the registration processes are different.Information is included on the SAM.gov website to help international registrations, including “Quick Start Guide for International Registrations” and “Helpful Hints.” Navigate to www.SAM.gov, click “HELP” in the top navigation bar, then click “Explore” and “New to SAM.gov?” for general information. Please note, guidance on SAM.gov and the guidance on GSA’s website about requirement for registering in SAM.gov is subject to change and is currently being updated. Applicants should review the website for the most up-to-date guidance.The attached “AQM Guidance for NCAGE-SAM.gov for Foreign Applicants Feb. 2023” is a compilation of resources gathered by the Department’s Office of Acquisitions Management (AQM). Any content shown from SAM.gov is not owned by the Department of State. This guidance and instruction are to the best of our knowledge based at the time of posting this solicitation. Where guidance in these attachments differs from the SAM.gov website, SAM.gov prevails and the applicant is encouraged to seek and document responses provided by the SAM.gov help desk.D.3.1 ExemptionsAn exemption from these requirements may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if:An applicant’s identity must be protected due to potential endangerment of their mission, their organization’s status, their employees, or individuals being served by the applicant.For an applicant, if the federal awarding agency makes a determination that there are exigent circumstances that prohibit the applicant from receiving a UEI and completing SAM.gov registration prior to receiving a federal award. In these instances, federal awarding agencies must require the recipient to obtain a UEI and complete SAM.gov registration within 30 days of the federal award date.Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least two weeks prior to the&nbsp;deadline in the NOFO&nbsp;providing a justification of their request. Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted Grants Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review.Note: As of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. As of February 2023, organizations based in the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. DoD awards are no longer required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.D.4 Submission Dates and Times Applications are due no later than 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST), on April 15, 2024 on https://www.grants.gov/ or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “FY23 J/IRF Supporting Religious and Cultural Heritage in Sri Lanka,” funding opportunity number SFOP0010241. Grants.gov and SAMS Domestic automatically log the date and time an application submission is made, and the Department of State will use this information to determine whether an application has been submitted on time. Late applications are neither reviewed nor considered. Known system errors caused by Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) that are outside of the applicant’s control will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Applicants should not expect a notification upon J/IRF receiving their application.D.5 Funding RestrictionsPrior to issuing a federal award with a total amount of federal share greater than $250,000, the Department of State is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is found in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov (41 USC §2313). An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM.gov and comment on any information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov. The Department of State will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant&#8217;s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.206.J/IRF will not consider applications that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization. Please refer the link for Foreign Terrorist Organizations: https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/Project activities whose direct beneficiaries are foreign militaries or paramilitary groups or individuals will not be considered for J/IRF funding given purpose limitations on funding.In accordance with Department of State policy for terrorism, applicants are advised that successful passing of vetting to evaluate the risk that funds may benefit terrorists or their supporters is a condition of award. If chosen for an award, applicants will be asked to submit information required by DS Form 4184, Risk Analysis Information (attached to this solicitation) about their company and its principal personnel. Vetting information is also required for all sub-award performance on assistance awards identified by the Department of State as presenting a risk of terrorist financing. Vetting information may also be requested for project beneficiaries and participants. Failure to submit information when requested, or failure to pass vetting, may be grounds for rejecting your proposal prior to award.The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. Per 22 USC §2378d(a) (2017), “No assistance shall be furnished under this chapter  or the Arms Export Control Act  to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.” Restrictions may apply to any proposed assistance to police or other law enforcement. Among these, pursuant to section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), no assistance provided through this funding opportunity may be furnished to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country when there is credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. In accordance with the requirements of section 620M of the FAA, also known as the Leahy law, project beneficiaries or participants from a foreign government’s security forces may need to be vetted by the Department before the provision of any assistance. If a proposed grant or cooperative agreement will provide assistance to foreign security forces or personnel, compliance with the Leahy Law is required.U.S. foreign assistance for Burma or Burmese beneficiaries is subject to restrictions. This includes restrictions, pursuant to section 7043(a)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. K, P.L. 117-328)(SFOAA), on funds appropriated under title III of the act for assistance for Burma. Section 7043(a)(3) provides that “none of the funds appropriated by this Act that are made available for assistance for Burma may be made available to the State Administration Council or any organization or entity controlled by, or an affiliate of, the armed forces of Burma, or to any individual or organization that has committed a gross violation of human rights or advocates violence against ethnic or religious groups or individuals in Burma, as determined by the Secretary of State.” In addition, funds cannot be made available to any individual or organization that has committed serious human rights abuse.Organizations should be cognizant of these restrictions when developing project proposals as these restrictions will require appropriate due diligence of program beneficiaries and collaboration with J/IRF to ensure compliance with these restrictions. Program beneficiaries subject to due diligence vetting will include any individuals or entities that are beneficiaries of foreign assistance funding or support. Due diligence vetting will include a review of open-source materials.Federal awards generally will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs; however, the Grants Officer may approve pre-award costs on a case-by-case basis. Generally, construction costs are not allowed under J/IRF awards. For additional information, please see the DRL Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for Applications: https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/.D.6 Application SubmissionAll application submissions must be made electronically via www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com). Both systems require registration by the applying organization. Please note that the Grants.gov registration process can take ten (10) business days or longer, even if all registration steps are completed in a timely manner.It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that it has an active registration in SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov. Applicants are required to document that the application has been received by SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov in its entirety. J/IRF bears no responsibility for disqualification that result from applicants not being registered before the due date, for system errors in either SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov, or other errors in the application process. Additionally, applicants must save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will not be accepted. Reasonable accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with disabilities or for security reasons. Applicants must follow all formatting instructions in the applicable NOFO and these instructions.J/IRF encourages organizations to submit applications during normal business hours (Monday – Friday, 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST)). If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted the appropriate help desk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g., if you have not received a response within 48 hours of contacting the help desk), you may contact the J/IRF point of contact listed in the NOFO in Section G. The point of contact may assist in contacting the appropriate help desk.The Grants Officer will determine technical eligibility of all applications.SAMS Domestic Applications:Applicants using SAMS Domestic for the first time should complete their “New Organization Registration.” To register with SAMS Domestic, click “Login to https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com” and follow the “create an account” link.Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA). If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the ILMS help desk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.Organizations must remember to save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.SAMS Domestic Help Desk:  For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com . Customer support is available 24/7.Grants.gov Applications: Applicants who do not submit applications via SAMS Domestic may submit via www.grants.gov.Please be advised that completing all the necessary registration steps for obtaining a username and password from Grants.gov can take ten (10) business days or longer.Please refer to the Grants.gov website for definitions of various &#8220;application statuses&#8221; 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. Validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days. Additionally, organizations must remember to save a screenshot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Grants.gov Helpdesk: For assistance with Grants.gov, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov. The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays. See https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/ for a list of federal holidays.E. Application Review InformationE.1 Proposal Review CriteriaThe J/IRF review panel will evaluate each application individually against the following criteria, listed below in order of importance, and not against competing applications. Please use the below criteria as a reference, but do not structure your application according to the sub-sections.Quality of Project IdeaApplications should be responsive to the program framework and policy objectives identified in the NOFO, appropriate in the country/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to J/IRF’s mission of promoting human rights and religious freedom. Projects should have the potential to have an immediate impact leading to long-term, sustainable reforms. J/IRF prefers new approaches that do not duplicate efforts by other entities. This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way. In countries where similar activities are already taking place, an explanation should be provided as to how new activities will not duplicate or merely add to existing activities and how these efforts will be coordinated. Proposals that promote creative approaches to recognized ongoing challenges are highly encouraged. J/IRF prioritizes project proposals with inclusive approaches for advancing these rights.Project Planning/Ability to Achieve ObjectivesA strong application will include a clear articulation of how the proposed project activities contribute to the overall project objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed. A comprehensive monthly work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization. Objectives should be ambitious yet measurable, results-focused and achievable in a reasonable timeframe. A complete application must include a Logic Model to demonstrate how the project activities will have an impact on its proposed objectives. The Logic Model should match the objectives, outcomes, key activities, and outputs described in the narrative. Applications should address how the project will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate.If local partners have been identified, J/IRF strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners. Additionally, applicants should describe the division of labor among the direct applicant and any local partners. If applicable, applications should identify target geographic areas for activities, target participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and the specific roles of sub-awardees, among other pertinent details.J/IRF recognizes that all programs have some level of risk due to internal/external variables that have the potential to adversely affect a program. Risk management should address how the project design incorporates the identification, assessment, and management of key risk factors. J/IRF will review the Risk Analysis based on the organization’s ability to identify risks that could have an impact on the overall program as well as how the organization will manage these risks.Institution’s Record and CapacityJ/IRF will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Applications should demonstrate an institutional record of successful democracy and human rights programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past grants. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the project&#8217;s objectives. Projects should have potential for continued funding beyond J/IRF resources.Addressing Barriers to Equal ParticipationJ/IRF strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of all persons. As the U.S. government’s lead bureau dedicated to promoting democratic governance, J/IRF requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.&nbsp; Discrimination,&nbsp;violence, inequity, and inequality targeting any members of society undermines collective security and threatens democracy. J/IRF prioritizes inclusive and integrated program models that assess and address the barriers to access for individuals and groups based on their race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. The proposal should also demonstrate how the project will further engagement in underserved communities and with individuals from underserved communities. Applicants should describe how programming will impact all of its beneficiaries, including support for underserved and underrepresented communities.&nbsp; This approach should be an integral part of both the concept and explicit design, and implementation of all proposed project activities, objectives, and monitoring. Strong proposals will provide specific analysis, measures, and corresponding targets as appropriate.&nbsp; Stakeholders shall identify the difference between opportunities and barriers to access, and design projects accordingly to not perpetuate these inequalities, but rather enhance programmatic impact by including all people in society. The goal of this approach is to bring communities and those in power together in support of more stable and secure societies.Cost EffectivenessJ/IRF strongly encourages applicants to clearly demonstrate project cost-effectiveness in their application, including examples of leveraging institutional and other resources. However, cost-sharing or other examples of leveraging other resources are not required. Inclusion of cost-sharing in the budget does not result in additional points awarded during the review process. Budgets should have low and/or reasonable overhead and administration costs, and applicants should provide clear explanations and justifications for these costs in relation to the work involved. All budget items should be clearly explained and justified to demonstrate necessity, appropriateness, and connection to the project objectives.Please note: If cost share is included in the budget, the recipient must maintain written records to support all allowable costs that are claimed as its contribution to cost share, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. In the event the recipient does not meet the minimum amount of cost-sharing as stipulated in the recipient’s budget, J/IRF’s contribution may be reduced in proportion to the recipient’s contribution.Multiplier Effect/SustainabilityApplications should clearly delineate how elements of the project will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant. A good multiplier effect will have an impact beyond the direct beneficiaries of the grant (e.g. participants trained under a grant go on to train other people; workshop participants use skills from a workshop to enhance a national level election that affects the entire populace). A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating continuing impact beyond the life of a project or garnering other donor support after J/IRF funding ceases.Project Monitoring and EvaluationComplete applications will include a detailed M&amp;E Narrative, which detail how the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated. Incorporating well-designed monitoring and evaluation processes into a project is an efficient method for documenting the change (intended and unintended) that a project seeks. Applications should demonstrate the capacity to provide objectives with measurable outputs and outcomes.The quality of the M&amp;E sections will be judged on the narrative explaining how both monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for those related activities. The M&amp;E Narrative should explain how evaluation(s), internal or external, will be incorporated into the project implementation plan or how the project will be systematically assessed in the absence of one. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the narrative.Note: Applicants are no longer required to submit a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in their proposals. However, applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, J/IRF will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.The output and outcome-based performance indicators should not only be separated by project objectives but also should match the objectives, outcomes, and outputs detailed in the Logic Model and Proposal Narrative. Performance indicators should be clearly defined (i.e., explained how the indicators will be measured and reported) either within the table or with a separate Performance Indicator Reference Sheet (PIRS). For each performance indicator, the table should also include baselines and quarterly and cumulative targets, data collection tools, data sources, types of data disaggregation, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation. There should also be metrics to capture how project activities target those who face discrimination due to their religion, gender, disabilities, ethnicity or sexual orientation and gender identity, where applicable. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the plan.E.2 Review and Selection ProcessJ/IRF strives to ensure that each application receives a balanced evaluation by a J/IRF review panel. AQM will determine technical eligibility for all applications. All technically eligible applications for a given NOFO are reviewed against the same seven criteria, which include quality of project idea, project planning/ability to achieve objectives, institutional record and capacity, inclusive programming, cost effectiveness, multiplier effect/sustainability, and project monitoring and evaluation.Additionally, the J/IRF review panel will evaluate how the application addresses the NOFO request, U.S. foreign policy goals, and the priority needs of J/IRF overall. J/IRF may also take into consideration the balance of the current portfolio of active projects, including geographic or thematic diversity, if needed.In most cases, the J/IRF review panel includes representatives from J/IRF, the appropriate Department of State regional bureau (to include feedback from U.S. embassies), and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (to include feedback from USAID missions). In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that are in a public-private partnership with J/IRF. At the end of the panel’s discussion about an application, the review panel votes on whether to recommend the application for approval by the Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom or their delegate. If more applications are recommended for approval than J/IRF can ultimately fund, the review panel will rank the recommended applications in priority order for consideration by the Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom or their delegate. The Grants Officer Representative (GOR) for the eventual award does not vote on the panel. All panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest agreements.J/IRF review panels may provide conditions and recommendations on applications to enhance the proposed project, which must be addressed by the applicant before further consideration of the award. To ensure effective use of DRL or J/IRF funds, conditions or recommendations may include requests to increase, decrease, clarify, and/or justify costs and project activities.F. Federal Award Administration InformationF.1 Federal Award NoticesJ/IRF will provide a separate notification to applicants on the result of their applications. Successful applicants will receive a letter electronically via email requesting that the applicant respond to review panel conditions and recommendations. This notification is not an authorization to begin activities and does not constitute formal approval or a funding commitment.Final approval is contingent on the applicant successfully responding to the review panel’s conditions and recommendations; being registered in required systems, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Payment Management System (PMS), unless an exemption is provided; and completing and providing any additional documentation requested by J/IRF or AQM. Final approval is also contingent on Congressional Notification requirements being met and final review and approval by the Department’s warranted Grants Officer.If awarded, payments under this award will be made through PMS or by completing form SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement. Final determination will be made in conjunction with the Grants Officer. Unless otherwise stipulated, the recipient may request payments on a reimbursement or advance basis.Instructions for requesting payments via PMS are available at: https://pms.psc.gov/.Instructions for requesting payments via SF-270 are available at: https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/SF270-V1.0.pdf .Advance payments must be limited to the minimum amounts needed and be timed to be in accordance with the actual, immediate cash requirements of the recipient in carrying out the purpose of this award. The timing and amount of advance payments must be as close as is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the recipient for direct program or project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs.The notice of Federal award signed by the Department’s warranted Grants Officers is the sole authorizing document. If awarded, the notice of Federal award will be provided to the applicant’s designated Authorizing Official via SAMS Domestic to be electronically counter-signed in the system.F.2 Administrative and National Policy and Legal RequirementsJ/IRF requires all recipients of foreign assistance funding to comply with all applicable Department and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to the following:The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR Chapter 200 (Sub-Chapters A through F) shall apply to all non-Federal entities, except for assistance awards to Individuals and Foreign Public Entities.&nbsp; Sub-Chapters A through E shall apply to all foreign organizations, and Sub-Chapters A through D shall apply to all U.S. and foreign for-profit entities.&nbsp;The applicant/recipient of the award and any sub-recipient under the award must comply with all applicable terms and conditions, in addition to the assurance and certifications made part of the Notice of Award.&nbsp; The Department’s Standard Terms and Conditions can be viewed at https://www.state.gov/about-us-office-of-the-procurement-executive/.Additionally, J/IRF supports implementation of the National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality; the Women Peace and Security (WPS) Act of 2017, which highlights the U.S. commitment to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution; and the Department of State WPS Implementation Plan. For additional information, please refer to the following link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1141.Due to the determination made under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) for funds obligated during FY 2024, assistance that benefits the governments of the following countries may be subject to a restriction under the TVPA.&nbsp; The Department of State determines on a case-by-case basis what constitutes assistance to a government; the general principles listed below apply.&nbsp;Assistance to the government includes:All branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) at all levels (national, regional, local);Public schools, universities, hospitals, and state-owned enterprises, as well as government employees;Cash, training, equipment, services, or other assistance provided directly to the government, assistance provided to an NGO or other implementer for the benefit of the government, and assistance to government employees.Subject to TVPA for funds obligated during FY 2024:AF: Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, South SudanEAP: Burma, China (PRC), Macau, North KoreaEUR: Belarus, RussiaNEA: Iran, SyriaSCA: AfghanistanWHA: Cuba, Curacao, Nicaragua, Sint MaartenAdditional requirements may be included depending on the content of the program.F.3 ReportingApplicants should be aware of the post-award reporting requirements for federal assistance awards as reflected in 2 CFR 200 Appendix XII &#8211; Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters. J/IRF awards require that all reports (financial and progress) are uploaded to the federal award file in SAMS Domestic on a quarterly basis. The Federal Financial Report (FFR or SF-425) is the required form for financial reports and must be submitted in PMS, and a copy of the report submitted in PMS then uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic. Progress reports uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic must include a narrative as described below as well as Program Indicators (or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer), including standard (F) framework indicators and J/IRF framework indicators. F and J/IRF framework indicators will be reviewed and negotiated during the final stages of issuing an award on a project-by-project basis.Narrative progress reports should reflect the focus on measuring the project’s progress on the overarching objectives and should be compiled according to the objectives, outcomes, and outputs as outlined in the award’s Scope of Work (SOW) and in the Monitoring &amp; Evaluation Narrative. An assessment of the overall project’s achievements should be included in each progress report. Where relevant, progress reports should include the following sections:Relevant contextual information (limited);Explanation and evaluation of significant activities of the reporting period and how the activities reflect progress toward achieving objectives, including meeting benchmarks/targets as set in the approved M&amp;E Plan. In addition, attach the M&amp;E Plan, comparing the target and actual numbers for the indicators;Any qualitative impact or success stories from the project, when possible;Copy of baseline, mid-term, and/or final evaluation report(s) conducted by an external evaluator; if applicable;Relevant supporting documentation or products related to the project activities (such as articles, meeting lists and agendas, participant surveys, photos, manuals, etc.) as separate attachments;Description of how the recipient is pursuing sustainability, including looking for sources of follow-on funding;Any problems/challenges in implementing the project and a corrective action plan with an updated timeline of activities;Reasons why established goals were not met;Data for the required F and/or J/IRF framework indicator(s) for the quarter as well as aggregate data by fiscal year;Program Indicators or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer;Proposed activities for the next quarter; and,Additional pertinent information, including analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs, if applicable.Foreign Assistance Data Review: As required by Congress, the Department of State must make progress in its efforts to improve tracking and reporting of foreign assistance data through the Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR). The FADR requires tracking of foreign assistance activity data from budgeting, planning, and allocation through obligation and disbursement. Successful applicants will be required to report and draw down federal funding based on the appropriate FADR Data Elements, indicated within their award documentation. In cases of more than one FADR Data Element, typically program or sector and/or regions or country, the successful applicant will be required to maintain separate accounting records.A final narrative and financial report must also be submitted within 120 days after the expiration of the award.Please note: Delays in reporting may result in delays of payment approvals and failure to provide required reports may jeopardize the recipient&#8217;s’ ability to receive future U.S. government funds. J/IRF reserves the right to request any additional programmatic and/or financial project information during the award period.G. Contact InformationFor technical submission questions related to this NOFO, please contact drlirfgrants@state.gov.For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://afsitsm.service-now.com/ilms/home. Customer support is available 24/7.Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA). If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the helpdesk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.For assistance with Grants.gov accounts and technical issues related to using the system, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov. The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.For a list of federal holidays visit:&nbsp;https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/Except for technical submission questions, during the NOFO period U.S. Department of State staff in Washington and overseas shall not discuss this competition with applicants until the entire proposal review process has been completed and rejection and approval letters have been transmitted.H. Other InformationApplicants should be aware that J/IRF understands that some information contained in applications may be considered sensitive or proprietary and will make appropriate efforts to protect such information. However, applicants are advised that J/IRF cannot guarantee that such information will not be disclosed, including pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or other similar statutes.The information in this NOFO and “Proposal Submission Instructions for Applications” is binding and may not be modified by any J/IRF representative. Explanatory information provided by J/IRF that contradicts this language will not be binding. Issuance of the NOFO and negotiation of applications does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government. J/IRF reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets.This NOFO will appear on www.grants.gov, SAMS Domestic, and DRL’s website https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/and J/IRF’s website https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/office-of-international-religious-freedom/&nbsp;&nbsp;
- Sri Lanka National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I congratulate the people of Sri Lanka as they celebrate the 76th anniversary of their country’s independence on February 4.The robust partnership between the United States and Sri Lanka is built upon our shared values, commitment to democracy, and a collective vision for a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific region. Our relationship spans security cooperation, mutually beneficial trade and investment, as well as people-to-people ties nurtured by educational exchanges and scientific partnerships. In the coming year, as partners in the Indo-Pacific, we will further deepen our economic and maritime security ties and continue to address the climate crisis and other key areas of shared concern.On its national day, Sri Lanka’s celebration of its sovereignty and independence underscores the ongoing commitment to strengthening democratic governance and inclusive economic growth and building resilient institutions that deliver for all Sri Lankans. The United States stands by Sri Lanka as it works to build a more prosperous future for all of its citizens.I wish the Sri Lankan people prosperity and happiness as they celebrate this important occasion.