Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48797 

psychological consultant’s review of the 

Physical Residual Functional Capacity 

Form, SSA–4734. The SSA–392 records 

the reviewing medical/psychological 

consultant’s assessment of the SSA– 

4734. It also documents whether the 

reviewer agrees or disagrees with how 

the adjudicator completed the SSA– 

4734. Medical/psychological 

consultants prepare the SSA–392 for 

each SSA–4734 an adjudicator 

completes. The respondents are 

medical/psychological consultants who 

conduct a quality review of adjudicating 

components’ completion of SSA’s 

medical assessment forms. 

Note: This is a correction notice. SSA 

published this information collection as an 

extension on July 27, 2009 at 74 FR 37081. 

Since we are revising the Privacy Act 

Statement, this is now a revision of an OMBapproved information collection. 

Type of Request: Revision of an OMBapproved information collection. 

Number of Respondents: 256. 

Frequency of Response: 359. 

Average Burden Per Response: 12 

minutes. 

Estimated Annual Burden: 18,381 

hours. 

3. Statement of Reclamation Action— 

31 CFR 210—0960–0734. SSA uses 

Form SSA–1713 to collect information 

to determine if a Canadian bank is able 

to return erroneous payments, and to 

determine how and when it can return 

the payments made after the death of a 

beneficiary who elected to have 

payments sent to Canada. Form SSA– 

1712 (or SSA–1712 CN) is the cover 

sheet SSA prepares to request return of 

a payment erroneously made after the 

death of the recipient. SSA sends Form 

SSA—1712 with Form SSA–1713. The 

respondents are Canadian financial 

institutions that received Social 

Security payments. 

Note: This is a correction notice. SSA 

published this information collection as an 

extension on July 10, 2009 at 74 FR 33313. 

Since we are revising the Privacy Act 

Statement, this is now a revision of an OMBapproved information collection. 

Type of Request: Revision of an OMBapproved information collection. 

Number of Respondents: 15. 

Frequency of Response: 1. 

Average Burden Per Response: 5 

minutes. 

Estimated Annual Burden: 1 hour. 

Dated: September 18, 2009. 

Elizabeth A. Davidson, 

Director, Center for Reports Clearance, Social 

Security Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–23074 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

[Docket No. SSA–2009–0061] 

Modifications to the Disability 

Determination Procedures; Extension 

of Testing of Some Disability Redesign 

Features 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration. 

ACTION: Notice of the extension of tests 

involving modifications to the disability 

determination procedures. 

SUMMARY: We are announcing the 

extension of tests involving 

modifications to disability 

determination procedures authorized by 

20 CFR 404.906 and 416.1406. These 

rules authorize us to test several 

modifications to the disability 

determination procedures for 

adjudicating claims for disability 

insurance benefits under title II of the 

Social Security Act (Act) and for 

supplemental security income payments 

based on disability under title XVI of 

the Act. 

DATES: We are extending our selection 

of cases to be included in these tests 

from September 30, 2009 until no later 

than September 28, 2012. If we decide 

to continue selection of cases for these 

tests beyond this date, we will publish 

another notice in the Federal Register. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michele Schaefer, Office of Disability 

Programs, Social Security 

Administration, 6401 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235–6401, 

410–594–0083, for information about 

this notice. For information on 

eligibility or filing for benefits, call our 

national toll-free number, 1–800–772– 

1213 or TTY 1–800–325–0778, or visit 

our Internet site, Social Security Online, 

at http://www.socialsecurity.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Our 

current rules authorize us to test, 

individually or in any combination, 

certain modifications of the disability 

determination procedures. 20 CFR 

404.906 and 416.1406. We have 

conducted several tests under the 

authority of these rules. In the ‘‘single 

decisionmaker,’’ test, a disability 

examiner may make the initial disability 

determination in most cases without 

obtaining the signature of a medical or 

psychological consultant. We also have 

conducted a separate test, which we call 

the ‘‘prototype,’’ in 10 States. 64 FR 

47218. Currently, the prototype 

combines the single decisionmaker 

approach described above with the 

elimination of the reconsideration level 

of our administrative review process. 

We have extended the time period for 

selecting claims for these tests several 

times. Most recently, on August 10, 

2006, we extended the time period until 

September 30, 2009. 71 FR 45890. We 

have decided to extend case selection 

for the current disability prototype 

process (single decisionmaker and 

elimination of the reconsideration step) 

and for the separate test of the single 

decisionmaker until September 28, 

2012. If we decide to end case selection 

for any part of the disability prototype 

in any the 10 States in which we are 

conducting the tests prior to September 

28, 2012, we will publish another notice 

in the Federal Register. 

Dated: September 18, 2009. 

David A. Rust, 

Deputy Commissioner for Retirement and 

Disability Policy. 

[FR Doc. E9–23110 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 6768] 

Bureau of Educational and Cultural 

Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant 

Proposals: FY–2010 Study of the 

United States Institutes for Scholars 

Announcement Type: New 

Cooperative Agreement. 

Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/ 

A/E/USS–10–02–04. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Number: 19.401. 

Key Dates 

Application Deadline: December 3, 

2009. 

Executive Summary: The Branch for 

the Study of the United States, Office of 

Academic Exchange Programs, Bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

invites proposal submissions for the 

design and implementation of three 

Study of the United States Institutes to 

take place over the course of six weeks 

beginning in June 2010. These Institutes 

should provide a multinational group of 

experienced educators with a deeper 

understanding of U.S. society, culture, 

values, and institutions. 

Two of these Institutes will be for 

groups of 18 foreign university level 

faculty, focusing on U.S. Culture and 

Society, and Journalism and Media. The 

third Institute will be a general survey 

course on the study of the United States 

for a group of 30 foreign secondary 

educators. 

Applicants may propose to host only 

one Institute listed under this 

competition. Should an applicant 

submit multiple proposals under this 

competition, all proposals will be 

declared technically ineligible and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
48798 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

given no further consideration in the 

review process. 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Authority 

Overall grant making authority for 

this program is contained in the Mutual 

Educational and Cultural Exchange Act 

of 1961, Public Law 87–256, as 

amended, also known as the FulbrightHays Act. The purpose of the Act is ‘‘to 

enable the Government of the United 

States to increase mutual understanding 

between the people of the United States 

and the people of other countries* * *; 

to strengthen the ties which unite us 

with other nations by demonstrating the 

educational and cultural interests, 

developments, and achievements of the 

people of the United States and other 

nations* * *and thus to assist in the 

development of friendly, sympathetic 

and peaceful relations between the 

United States and the other countries of 

the world.’’ The funding authority for 

the program above is provided through 

legislation. 

Purpose: Study of the United States 

Institutes are intensive academic 

programs whose purpose is to provide 

foreign university faculty, secondary 

educators, and other scholars the 

opportunity to deepen their 

understanding of American society, 

culture, and institutions. The ultimate 

goal is to strengthen curricula and to 

improve the quality of teaching about 

the United States in academic 

institutions abroad. 

The Bureau is seeking detailed 

proposals for three different Study of 

the United States Institutes from U.S. 

colleges, universities, and other not-forprofit academic organizations that have 

an established reputation in a field or 

discipline related to the specific 

program themes. 

Overview: Each program should be six 

weeks in length; participants will spend 

approximately four weeks at the host 

institution, and approximately two 

weeks on the educational study tour, 

including two to three days in 

Washington, DC, at the conclusion of 

the Institute. The educational travel 

component should directly complement 

the academic program, and should 

include visits to cities and other sites of 

interest in the region around the 

awardee institution, as well as to 

another geographic region of the 

country. The awardee institution also 

will be expected to provide participants 

with guidance and resources for further 

investigation and research on the topics 

and issues examined during the 

institute after they return home. 

The Study of the U.S. Institute on U.S. 

Culture and Society should provide a 

multinational group of 18 experienced 

and highly-motivated foreign university 

faculty and other specialists with a 

deeper understanding of U.S. society, 

culture, values, and institutions. The 

Institute should examine the ethnic, 

racial, economic, political, and religious 

contexts in which various cultures have 

manifested themselves in U.S. society, 

and the ways in which these cultures 

have influenced both social movements 

and historical epochs throughout U.S. 

history. The program should draw from 

a diverse disciplinary base, and should 

itself provide a model of how a foreign 

university might approach the study of 

U.S. culture and society. One award of 

up to $290,000 will support this 

Institute. 

The Study of the U.S. Institute on 

Journalism and Media should provide a 

multinational group of 18 experienced 

and highly-motivated foreign journalism 

instructors and other related specialists 

with a deeper understanding of the roles 

that journalism and the media play in 

U.S. society. The Institute should 

examine the rights and responsibilities 

of the media in a democratic society, 

including editorial independence, 

journalistic ethics, legal constraints, 

foreign policy issues, and media 

business models. The Institute should 

include strategies for teaching students 

of journalism the basics of the 

tradecraft: researching, reporting, 

writing, and editing. The program 

should also highlight technology’s 

impact on journalism, addressing the 

influence of the Internet, the 

globalization of the news media, the 

growth of satellite television and radio 

networks, and other advances in media 

that are transforming the profession. 

One award of up to $290,000 will 

support this Institute. 

The Study of the U.S. Institute for 

Secondary Educators should provide a 

multinational group of 30 experienced 

secondary school educators (teachers, 

teacher trainers, curriculum developers, 

textbook writers, or education ministry 

officials) with a deeper understanding of 

U.S. society, education, and culture— 

past and present. The Institute should 

be organized around a central theme or 

themes in U.S. civilization and should 

have a strong contemporary component. 

Through a combination of traditional, 

multi-disciplinary, and interdisciplinary 

approaches, program content should be 

imaginatively integrated in order to 

elucidate the history and evolution of 

U.S. educational institutions and values, 

broadly defined. The program should 

also serve to illuminate contemporary 

political, social, and economic debates 

in American society. One award of up 

to $360,000 will support this Institute. 

Program Design: Each Study of the 

U.S. Institute should be designed as an 

intensive, academically rigorous 

seminar for an experienced group of 

educators from abroad. Each Institute 

should be organized through an 

integrated series of lectures, readings, 

seminar discussions, and regional travel 

and site visits, and also should include 

sessions that expose participants to U.S. 

pedagogical philosophy and practice for 

teaching the discipline. Each Institute 

also should include some opportunity 

for limited but well-directed 

independent research. 

Applicants are encouraged to design 

thematically coherent programs in ways 

that draw upon the particular strengths, 

faculty, and resources of their 

institutions as well as upon the 

nationally recognized expertise of 

scholars and other experts throughout 

the United States. 

Participants: Participants will be 

nominated by U.S. Embassies and 

Fulbright Commissions from all regions 

of the world, with final selection made 

by the Bureau’s Branch for the Study of 

the United States. Every effort will be 

made to select a balanced mix of male 

and female participants. Participants 

will be diverse in terms of age, 

professional position, and experience 

abroad. All participants will have a 

good knowledge of English. 

Participants may come from 

educational institutions where the study 

of the United States is relatively welldeveloped, or they may be pioneers in 

this field at their home institutions. 

Some participants may not have visited 

the United States previously, while 

others may have had sustained 

professional contact with American 

scholars and American scholarship as 

well as prior study and travel 

experience in the U.S. In all cases, 

participants will be accomplished 

teachers and scholars who will be 

prepared to participate in an 

intellectually rigorous academic 

seminar that offers a collegial 

atmosphere conducive to the exchange 

of ideas. 

Program Dates: The Institutes should 

be a maximum of 44 days in length 

(including participant arrival and 

departure days) and should begin by 

June 2010. 

Program Guidelines: While the 

conception and structure of the Institute 

agenda is the responsibility of the 

organizers, it is essential that proposals 

provide a detailed and comprehensive 

narrative describing the objectives of the 

Institute; the title, scope and content of 

each session; planned site visits; and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48799 

how each session relates to the overall 

institute theme. Proposals must include 

a syllabus that indicates the subject 

matter for each lecture, panel 

discussion, group presentation, or other 

activity. The syllabus also should 

confirm or provisionally identify 

proposed speakers, trainers, and session 

leaders, and clearly show how assigned 

readings will advance the goals of each 

session. Overall, proposals will be 

reviewed on the basis of their 

responsiveness to RFGP criteria, 

coherence, clarity, and attention to 

detail. The accompanying Project 

Objectives, Goals, and Implementation 

(POGI) document provides programspecific guidelines that all proposals 

must address fully. 

Please Note: In a cooperative agreement, 

the Branch for the Study of the United States 

is substantially involved in program 

activities above and beyond routine grant 

monitoring. The Branch will assume the 

following responsibilities for the Institute: 

Participate in the selection of participants; 

oversee the Institute through one or more site 

visits; debrief participants in Washington, DC 

at the conclusion of the Institute; and engage 

in follow-on communication with the 

participants after they return to their home 

countries. The Branch may request that the 

awardee institution make modifications to 

the academic residency and/or educational 

travel components of the program. The 

recipient will be required to obtain approval 

of significant program changes in advance of 

their implementation. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

Agreement. ECA’s level of involvement 

in this program is listed under number 

I above. 

Fiscal Year Funds: FY 2010. 

Approximate Total Funding: 

$920,000. 

Approximate Number of Awards: 

Three (3). 

Approximate Average Award: Two 

awards of $290,000 for 18 participants 

each; one award of $360,000 for 30 

participants. 

Floor of Award Range: $290,000. 

Ceiling of Award Range: $360,000. 

Anticipated Award Date: Pending 

availability of funds, March 1, 2010. 

Anticipated Project Completion Date: 

March 2011. 

Additional Information: Pending 

successful implementation of this 

program and the availability of funds in 

subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA’s 

intent to renew this cooperative 

agreement for two additional fiscal years 

before openly competing it again. 

III. Eligibility Information 

III.1. Eligible Applicants 

Applications may be submitted by 

public and private non-profit 

organizations meeting the provisions 

described in Internal Revenue Code 

section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). 

III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds 

There is no minimum or maximum 

percentage required for this 

competition. However, the Bureau 

encourages applicants to provide 

maximum levels of cost sharing and 

funding in support of its programs. 

When cost sharing is offered, it is 

understood and agreed that the 

applicant must provide the amount of 

cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal 

and later included in an approved 

agreement. Cost sharing may be in the 

form of allowable direct or indirect 

costs. For accountability, you must 

maintain written records to support all 

costs which are claimed as your 

contribution, as well as costs to be paid 

by the Federal government. Such 

records are subject to audit. The basis 

for determining the value of cash and 

in-kind contributions must be in 

accordance with OMB Circular A–110, 

(Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing 

and Matching. In the event you do not 

provide the minimum amount of cost 

sharing as stipulated in the approved 

budget, ECA’s contribution will be 

reduced in like proportion. 

III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements 

(a.) Bureau grant guidelines require 

that organizations with fewer than four 

years experience in conducting 

international exchanges be limited to 

$60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA 

anticipates making three awards, two in 

an amount up to $290,000, and in one 

in an amount up to $360,000 to support 

the program and administrative costs 

required to implement this exchange 

program. Therefore, organizations with 

fewer than four years experience in 

conducting international exchanges are 

ineligible to apply under this 

competition. The Bureau encourages 

applicants to provide maximum levels 

of cost sharing and funding in support 

of its programs. 

(b.) Technical Eligibility: It is the 

Bureau’s intent to award three separate 

cooperative agreements to three 

different institutions under this 

competition. Therefore prospective 

applicants may submit only one 

proposal under this competition. All 

applicants must comply with this 

requirement. Should an applicant 

submit multiple proposals under this 

competition, all proposals will be 

declared technically ineligible and 

given no further consideration in the 

review process. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

Note: Please read the complete 

announcement before sending inquiries or 

submitting proposals. Once the RFGP 

deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not 

discuss this competition with applicants 

until the proposal review process has been 

completed. 

IV.1. Contact Information To Request an 

Application Package 

Please contact the Branch for the 

Study of the United States, ECA/A/E/ 

USS, Fourth Floor, U.S. Department of 

State, SA–5, 2200 C Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20522–0504, (202) 632– 

3340 to request a Solicitation Package. 

Please refer to the Funding Opportunity 

Number ECA/A/E/USS–10–02–04 

located at the top of this announcement 

when making your request. 

Alternatively, an electronic 

application package may be obtained 

from grants.gov. Please see section IV.3f 

for further information. 

The Solicitation Package contains the 

Proposal Submission Instruction (PSI) 

document which consists of required 

application forms, and standard 

guidelines for proposal preparation. 

It also contains the Project Objectives, 

Goals, and Implementation (POGI) 

document, which provides specific 

information, award criteria and budget 

instructions tailored to this competition. 

Please specify Brendan M. Walsh and 

refer to the Funding Opportunity 

Number ECA/A/E/USS–10–02–04 

located at the top of this announcement 

on all other inquiries and 

correspondence. 

IV.2. To Download a Solicitation 

Package Via Internet 

The entire Solicitation Package may 

be downloaded from the Bureau’s Web 

site at http://exchanges.state.gov/grants/ 

open2.html, or from the Grants.gov Web 

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

Please read all information before 

downloading. 

IV.3. Content and Form of Submission 

Applicants must follow all 

instructions in the Solicitation Package. 

The application should be submitted 

per the instructions under IV.3f. 

‘‘Application Deadline and Methods of 

Submission’’ section below. 

IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun 

and Bradstreet Data Universal 

Numbering System (DUNS) number to 

apply for a grant or cooperative 

agreement from the U.S. Government. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
48800 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

This number is a nine-digit 

identification number, which uniquely 

identifies business entities. Obtaining a 

DUNS number is easy and there is no 

charge. To obtain a DUNS number, 

access http:// 

www.dunandbradstreet.com or call 1– 

866–705–5711. Please ensure that your 

DUNS number is included in the 

appropriate box of the SF–424 which is 

part of the formal application package. 

IV.3b. All proposals must contain an 

executive summary, proposal narrative, 

and budget. 

Please Refer to the Solicitation 

Package. It contains the mandatory 

Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) 

document and the Project Objectives, 

Goals, and Implementation (POGI) 

document for additional formatting and 

technical requirements. 

IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status 

with the IRS at the time of application. 

Please Note: Effective January 7, 2009, all 

applicants for ECA federal assistance awards 

must include in their application the names 

of directors and/or senior executives (current 

officers, trustees, and key employees, 

regardless of amount of compensation). In 

fulfilling this requirement, applicants must 

submit information in one of the following 

ways: 

(1) Those who file Internal Revenue 

Service Form 990, ‘‘Return of 

Organization Exempt From Income 

Tax,’’ must include a copy of relevant 

portions of this form. 

(2) Those who do not file IRS Form 

990 must submit information above in 

the format of their choice. 

In addition to final program reporting 

requirements, award recipients will also 

be required to submit a one-page 

document, derived from their program 

reports, listing and describing their 

grant activities. For award recipients, 

the names of directors and/or senior 

executives (current officers, trustees, 

and key employees), as well as the onepage description of grant activities, will 

be transmitted by the State Department 

to OMB, along with other information 

required by the Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act 

(FFATA), and will be made available to 

the public by the Office of Management 

and Budget on its USASpending.gov 

Web site as part of ECA’s FFATA 

reporting requirements. 

If your organization is a private 

nonprofit which has not received a grant 

or cooperative agreement from ECA in 

the past three years, or if your 

organization received nonprofit status 

from the IRS within the past four years, 

you must submit the necessary 

documentation to verify nonprofit status 

as directed in the PSI document. Failure 

to do so will cause your proposal to be 

declared technically ineligible. 

IV.3d. Please take into consideration 

the following information when 

preparing your proposal narrative: 

IV.3d.1. Adherence to all Regulations 

Governing The J Visa 

The Bureau of Educational and 

Cultural Affairs places critically 

important emphases on the security and 

proper administration of the Exchange 

Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence 

by award recipients and sponsors to all 

regulations governing the J visa. 

Therefore, proposals should 

demonstrate the applicant’s capacity to 

meet all requirements governing the 

administration of the Exchange Visitor 

Programs as set forth in 22 CFR 62, 

including the oversight of Responsible 

Officers and Alternate Responsible 

Officers, screening and selection of 

program participants, provision of prearrival information and orientation to 

participants, monitoring of participants, 

proper maintenance and security of 

forms, recordkeeping, reporting and 

other requirements. 

ECA will be responsible for issuing 

DS–2019 forms to participants in this 

program. 

A copy of the complete regulations 

governing the administration of 

Exchange Visitor (J) programs is 

available at http://exchanges.state.gov 

or from: United States Department of 

State, Office of Exchange Coordination 

and Designation, Office of Designation, 

ECA/EC/D, SA–5, Floor C2, Department 

of State, Washington, DC 20522–0582. 

Please refer to Solicitation Package for 

further information. 

IV.3d.2. Diversity, Freedom and 

Democracy Guidelines 

Pursuant to the Bureau’s authorizing 

legislation, programs must maintain a 

non-political character and should be 

balanced and representative of the 

diversity of American political, social, 

and cultural life. ‘‘Diversity’’ should be 

interpreted in the broadest sense and 

encompass differences including, but 

not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, 

religion, geographic location, socioeconomic status, and disabilities. 

Applicants are strongly encouraged to 

adhere to the advancement of this 

principle both in program 

administration and in program content. 

Please refer to the review criteria under 

the ‘Support for Diversity’ section for 

specific suggestions on incorporating 

diversity into your proposal. Public Law 

104–319 provides that ‘‘in carrying out 

programs of educational and cultural 

exchange in countries whose people do 

not fully enjoy freedom and 

democracy,’’ the Bureau ‘‘shall take 

appropriate steps to provide 

opportunities for participation in such 

programs to human rights and 

democracy leaders of such countries.’’ 

Public Law 106–113 requires that the 

governments of the countries described 

above do not have inappropriate 

influence in the selection process. 

Proposals should reflect advancement of 

these goals in their program contents, to 

the full extent deemed feasible. 

IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and 

Evaluation 

Proposals must include a plan to 

monitor and evaluate the project’s 

success, both as the activities unfold 

and at the end of the program. The 

Bureau recommends that your proposal 

include a draft survey questionnaire or 

other technique plus a description of a 

methodology to use to link outcomes to 

original project objectives. The Bureau 

expects that the recipient organization 

will track participants or partners and 

be able to respond to key evaluation 

questions, including satisfaction with 

the program, learning as a result of the 

program, changes in behavior as a result 

of the program, and effects of the 

program on institutions (institutions in 

which participants work or partner 

institutions). The evaluation plan 

should include indicators that measure 

gains in mutual understanding as well 

as substantive knowledge. 

Successful monitoring and evaluation 

depend heavily on setting clear goals 

and outcomes at the outset of a program. 

Your evaluation plan should include a 

description of your project’s objectives, 

your anticipated project outcomes, and 

how and when you intend to measure 

these outcomes (performance 

indicators). The more that outcomes are 

‘‘smart’’ (specific, measurable, 

attainable, results-oriented, and placed 

in a reasonable time frame), the easier 

it will be to conduct the evaluation. You 

should also show how your project 

objectives link to the goals of the 

program described in this RFGP. 

Your monitoring and evaluation plan 

should clearly distinguish between 

program outputs and outcomes. Outputs 

are products and services delivered, 

often stated as an amount. Output 

information is important to show the 

scope or size of project activities, but it 

cannot substitute for information about 

progress towards outcomes or the 

results achieved. Examples of outputs 

include the number of people trained or 

the number of seminars conducted. 

Outcomes, in contrast, represent 

specific results a project is intended to 

achieve and is usually measured as an 

extent of change. Findings on outputs 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48801 

and outcomes should both be reported, 

but the focus should be on outcomes. 

We encourage you to assess the 

following four levels of outcomes, as 

they relate to the program goals set out 

in the RFGP (listed here in increasing 

order of importance): 

1. Participant satisfaction with the 

program and exchange experience. 

2. Participant learning, such as 

increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, 

and changed understanding and 

attitude. Learning includes both 

substantive (subject-specific) learning 

and mutual understanding. 

3. Participant behavior, concrete 

actions to apply knowledge in work or 

community; greater participation and 

responsibility in civic organizations; 

interpretation and explanation of 

experiences and new knowledge gained; 

continued contacts between 

participants, community members, and 

others. 

4. Institutional changes, such as 

increased collaboration and 

partnerships, policy reforms, new 

programming, and organizational 

improvements. 

Please Note: Consideration should be given 

to the appropriate timing of data collection 

for each level of outcome. For example, 

satisfaction is usually captured as a shortterm outcome, whereas behavior and 

institutional changes are normally 

considered longer-term outcomes. 

Overall, the quality of your 

monitoring and evaluation plan will be 

judged on how well it (1) specifies 

intended outcomes; (2) gives clear 

descriptions of how each outcome will 

be measured; (3) identifies when 

particular outcomes will be measured; 

and (4) provides a clear description of 

the data collection strategies for each 

outcome (i.e., surveys, interviews, or 

focus groups). (Please note that 

evaluation plans that deal only with the 

first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will 

be deemed less competitive under the 

present evaluation criteria.) 

Recipient organizations will be 

required to provide reports analyzing 

their evaluation findings to the Bureau 

in their regular program reports. All 

data collected, including survey 

responses and contact information, must 

be maintained for a minimum of three 

years and provided to the Bureau upon 

request. 

IV.3e. Please take the following 

information into consideration when 

preparing your budget: 

IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit SF– 

424A—‘‘Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs’’ along with a 

comprehensive budget for the entire 

program. Budget requests for either of 

the two scholar institutes may not 

exceed $290,000, and administrative 

costs should be no more than 

approximately $95,000. Budget requests 

for the Institute for Secondary Educators 

may not exceed $360,000, and 

administrative costs should be no more 

than approximately $110,000. There 

must be a summary budget as well as 

breakdowns reflecting both 

administrative and program budgets. 

Applicants may provide separate subbudgets for each program component, 

phase, location, or activity to provide 

clarification. 

IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the 

program include the following: 

(1) Institute staff salary and benefits 

(2) Participant housing and meals 

(3) Participant travel and per diem 

(4) Textbooks, educational materials, 

and admissions fees 

(5) Honoraria for guest speakers 

(6) Follow-on programming for 

alumni of Study of the United States 

programs. 

Please refer to the Solicitation 

Package for complete budget guidelines 

and formatting instructions. 

IV.3f. Application Deadline and 

Methods of Submission 

Application Deadline Date: December 

3, 2009. 

Reference Number: ECA/A/E/USS– 

10–02–04. 

Methods of Submission: Applications 

may be submitted in one of two ways: 

(1) In hard-copy, via a nationally 

recognized overnight delivery service 

(i.e., Federal Express, UPS, Airborne 

Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express 

Overnight Mail, etc.), or 

(2) Electronically through http:// 

www.grants.gov. 

Please Note: ECA strongly encourages 

organizations interested in applying for this 

competition to submit printed, hard copy 

applications as outlined in section IV.3f.1., 

below rather than submitting electronically 

through Grants.gov. This recommendation is 

being made as a result of the anticipated high 

volume of grant proposals that will be 

submitted via the Grants.gov Web portal as 

part of the Recovery Act stimulus package. 

As stated in this RFGP, ECA bears no 

responsibility for data errors resulting from 

transmission or conversion processes for 

proposals submitted via Grants.gov. 

Along with the Project Title, all 

applicants must enter the above 

Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF– 

424 contained in the mandatory 

Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) 

of the solicitation document. 

IV.3f.1. Submitting Printed Applications 

Applications must be shipped no later 

than the above deadline. Delivery 

services used by applicants must have 

in-place, centralized shipping 

identification and tracking systems that 

may be accessed via the Internet and 

delivery people who are identifiable by 

commonly recognized uniforms and 

delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on 

or before the above deadline but 

received at ECA more than seven days 

after the deadline will be ineligible for 

further consideration under this 

competition. Proposals shipped after the 

established deadlines are ineligible for 

consideration under this competition. 

ECA will not notify you upon receipt of 

application. It is each applicant’s 

responsibility to ensure that each 

package is marked with a legible 

tracking number and to monitor/confirm 

delivery to ECA via the Internet. 

Delivery of proposal packages may not 

be made via local courier service or in 

person for this competition. Faxed 

documents will not be accepted at any 

time. Only proposals submitted as 

stated above will be considered. 

Important Note: When preparing your 

submission please make sure to include one 

extra copy of the completed SF–424 form and 

place it in an envelope addressed to ‘‘ECA/ 

EX/PM’’. 

The original and six (6) copies of the 

application should be sent to: Program 

Management Division, ECA–IIP/EX/PM, 

Ref.: ECA/A/E/USS–10–02–04, SA–5, 

Floor 4, Department of State, 2200 C 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20522– 

0504. 

Applicants submitting hard-copy 

applications must also submit the 

‘‘Executive Summary’’ and ‘‘Proposal 

Narrative’’ sections of the proposal in 

text (.txt) or Microsoft Word format on 

a PC-formatted CD. 

IV.3f.2. Submitting Electronic 

Applications 

Applicants have the option of 

submitting proposals electronically 

through Grants.gov (http:// 

www.grants.gov). Complete solicitation 

packages are available at Grants.gov in 

the ‘‘Find’’ portion of the system. 

Please Note: ECA strongly encourages 

organizations interested in applying for this 

competition to submit printed, hard copy 

applications as outlined in section IV.3f.1. 

above, rather than submitting electronically 

through Grants.gov. This recommendation is 

being made as a result of the anticipated high 

volume of grant proposals that will be 

submitted via the Grants.gov webportal as 

part of the Recovery Act stimulus package. 

As stated in this RFGP, ECA bears no 

responsibility for data errors resulting from 

transmission or conversion processes for 

proposals submitted via Grants.gov. 

Please follow the instructions 

available in the ‘Get Started’ portion of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
48802 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 

the site (http://www.grants.gov/ 

GetStarted). 

Several of the steps in the Grants.gov 

registration process could take several 

weeks. Therefore, applicants should 

check with appropriate staff within their 

organizations immediately after 

reviewing this RFGP to confirm or 

determine their registration status with 

Grants.gov. 

Once registered, the amount of time it 

can take to upload an application will 

vary depending on a variety of factors 

including the size of the application and 

the speed of your internet connection. 

In addition, validation of an electronic 

submission via Grants.gov can take up 

to two business days. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend 

that you not wait until the application 

deadline to begin the submission 

process through Grants.gov. 

The Grants.gov Web site includes 

extensive information on all phases/ 

aspects of the Grants.gov process, 

including an extensive section on 

frequently asked questions, located 

under the ‘‘For Applicants’’ section of 

the Web site. ECA strongly recommends 

that all potential applicants review 

thoroughly the Grants.gov Web site, 

well in advance of submitting a 

proposal through the Grants.gov system. 

ECA bears no responsibility for data 

errors resulting from transmission or 

conversion processes. 

Direct all questions regarding 

Grants.gov registration and submission 

to: Grants.gov Customer Support, 

Contact Center Phone: 800–518–4726, 

Business Hours: Monday–Friday, 7 

a.m.–9 p.m. Eastern Time, E-mail: 

support@grants.gov. 

Applicants have until midnight (12 

a.m.), Washington, DC time of the 

closing date to ensure that their entire 

application has been uploaded to the 

Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions 

to the above deadline. Applications 

uploaded to the site after midnight of 

the application deadline date will be 

automatically rejected by the grants.gov 

system, and will be technically 

ineligible. 

Please refer to the Grants.gov Web 

site, for definitions of various 

‘‘application statuses’’ and the 

difference between a submission receipt 

and a submission validation. Applicants 

will receive a validation e-mail from 

grants.gov upon the successful 

submission of an application. Again, 

validation of an electronic submission 

via Grants.gov can take up to two 

business days. Therefore, we strongly 

recommend that you not wait until the 

application deadline to begin the 

submission process through Grants.gov. 

ECA will not notify you upon receipt of 

electronic applications. 

It is the responsibility of all 

applicants submitting proposals via the 

Grants.gov web portal to ensure that 

proposals have been received by 

Grants.Gov in their entirety, and ECA 

bears no responsibility for data errors 

resulting from transmission or 

conversion processes. 

Optional—IV.3f.3 You may also state 

here any limitations on the number of 

applications that an applicant may 

submit and make it clear whether the 

limitation is on the submitting 

organization, individual program 

director or both. 

IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of 

Applications: Executive Order 12372 

does not apply to this program. 

V. Application Review Information 

V.1. Review Process 

The Bureau will review all proposals 

for technical eligibility. Proposals will 

be deemed ineligible if they do not fully 

adhere to the guidelines stated herein 

and in the Solicitation Package. All 

eligible proposals will be reviewed by 

the program office, as well as the Public 

Diplomacy section overseas, where 

appropriate. Eligible proposals will be 

subject to compliance with Federal and 

Bureau regulations and guidelines and 

forwarded to Bureau grant panels for 

advisory review. Proposals may also be 

reviewed by the Office of the Legal 

Adviser or by other Department 

elements. Final funding decisions are at 

the discretion of the Department of 

State’s Assistant Secretary for 

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final 

technical authority for cooperative 

agreements resides with the Bureau’s 

Grants Officer. 

Review Criteria 

Technically eligible applications will 

be competitively reviewed according to 

the criteria stated below. These criteria 

are not rank ordered and all carry equal 

weight in the proposal evaluation: 

1. Quality of Program Plan and Ability 

to Achieve Program Objectives: 

Proposals should exhibit originality, 

substance, precision, and relevance to 

the Bureau’s mission. A detailed agenda 

and relevant work plan should 

demonstrate substantive undertakings 

and logistical capacity. Objectives 

should be reasonable, feasible, and 

flexible. Proposals should demonstrate 

clearly how the institution will meet the 

program’s objectives and plan. 

2. Support for Diversity: Proposals 

should demonstrate substantive support 

of the Bureau’s policy on diversity. 

Achievable and relevant features should 

be cited in both program administration 

(program venue and program 

evaluation) and program content 

(orientation and wrap-up sessions, 

program meetings, presenters, and 

resource materials). 

3. Evaluation and Follow-Up: 

Proposals should include a plan to 

evaluate the activity’s success, both as 

the activities unfold and at the end of 

the program. A draft survey 

questionnaire or other technique plus a 

description of a methodology to use to 

link outcomes to original project 

objectives is strongly recommended. 

Proposals also should discuss 

provisions made for follow-up with 

returned participants as a means of 

establishing longer-term individual and 

institutional linkages. 

4. Cost-Effectiveness/Cost-Sharing: 

The overhead and administrative 

components of the proposal, including 

salaries and honoraria, should be kept 

as low as possible. All other items 

should be necessary and appropriate. 

Proposals should maximize cost-sharing 

through other private sector support, as 

well as institutional direct funding 

contributions. 

5. Institutional Track Record/Ability: 

Proposals should demonstrate an 

institutional record of successful 

exchange programs, including 

responsible fiscal management and full 

compliance with all reporting 

requirements for past Bureau grants as 

determined by Bureau Grants Staff. The 

Bureau will consider the past 

performance of prior recipients and the 

demonstrated potential of new 

applicants. Proposed personnel and 

institutional resources should be fully 

qualified to achieve the project’s goals. 

VI. Award Administration Information 

VI.1a. Award Notices 

Final awards cannot be made until 

funds have been appropriated by 

Congress, allocated and committed 

through internal Bureau procedures. 

Successful applicants will receive a 

Federal Assistance Award (FAA) from 

the Bureau’s Grants Office. The FAA 

and the original proposal with 

subsequent modifications (if applicable) 

shall be the only binding authorizing 

document between the recipient and the 

U.S. Government. The FAA will be 

signed by an authorized Grants Officer, 

and mailed to the recipient’s 

responsible officer identified in the 

application. 

Unsuccessful applicants will receive 

notification of the results of the 

application review from the ECA 

program office coordinating this 

competition. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices 48803 

VI.2 Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements 

Terms and Conditions for the 

Administration of ECA agreements 

include the following: 

Office of Management and Budget 

Circular A–122, ‘‘Cost Principles for 

Nonprofit Organizations.’’ 

Office of Management and Budget 

Circular A–21, ‘‘Cost Principles for 

Educational Institutions.’’ 

OMB Circular A–87, ‘‘Cost Principles 

for State, Local and Indian 

Governments.’’ 

OMB Circular No. A–110 (Revised), 

‘‘Uniform Administrative 

Requirements for Grants and 

Agreements with Institutions of 

Higher Education, Hospitals, and 

other Nonprofit Organizations.’’ 

OMB Circular No. A–102, Uniform 

Administrative Requirements for 

Grants-in-Aid to State and Local 

Governments. 

OMB Circular No. A–133, Audits of 

States, Local Government, and Nonprofit Organizations. 

Please reference the following Web 

sites for additional information: 

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

http://fa.statebuy.state.gov 

VI.3. Reporting Requirements 

You must provide ECA with a hard 

copy original plus one copy of the 

following reports: 

(1) An interim program report no 

more than 90 days after the completion 

of the summer Institute; 

(2) A final program and financial 

report no more than 90 days after the 

expiration of the award; 

(3) A concise, one-page final program 

report summarizing program outcomes 

no more than 90 days after the 

expiration of the award. This one-page 

report will be transmitted to OMB, and 

be made available to the public via 

OMB’s USAspending.gov Web site—as 

part of ECA’s Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act 

(FFATA) reporting requirements. 

(4) An SF–PPR, ‘‘Performance 

Progress Report’’ Cover Sheet with all 

program reports. 

Award recipients will be required to 

provide reports analyzing their 

evaluation findings to the Bureau in 

their regular program reports. (Please 

refer to IV. Application and Submission 

Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program 

Monitoring and Evaluation information. 

All data collected, including survey 

responses and contact information, must 

be maintained for a minimum of three 

years and provided to the Bureau upon 

request. 

All reports must be sent to the ECA 

Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer 

listed in the final assistance award 

document. 

VII. Agency Contacts 

For questions about this 

announcement, contact: Brendan M. 

Walsh, Branch for the Study of the 

United States, ECA/A/E/USS, U.S. 

Department of State, Fourth Floor, U.S. 

Department of State, SA–5, 2200 C 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20522– 

0504, phone: (202) 632–3340, or e-mail: 

WalshBM@state.gov. 

All correspondence with the Bureau 

concerning this RFGP should reference 

the above title and number ECA/A/E/ 

USS–10–02–04. 

Please read the complete 

announcement before sending inquiries 

or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP 

deadline has passed, Bureau staff may 

not discuss this competition with 

applicants until the proposal review 

process has been completed. 

VIII. Other Information 

Notice 

The terms and conditions published 

in this RFGP are binding and may not 

be modified by any Bureau 

representative. Explanatory information 

provided by the Bureau that contradicts 

published language will not be binding. 

Issuance of the RFGP does not 

constitute an award commitment on the 

part of the Government. The Bureau 

reserves the right to reduce, revise, or 

increase proposal budgets in accordance 

with the needs of the program and the 

availability of funds. Awards made will 

be subject to periodic reporting and 

evaluation requirements per section VI.3 

above. 

Dated: September 17, 2009. 

Maura M. Pally, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational 

and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of 

State. 

[FR Doc. E9–23108 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 6769] 

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs: 

Directorate of Defense Trade Controls; 

Notifications to the Congress of 

Proposed Commercial Export Licenses 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the Department of State has forwarded 

the attached Notifications of Proposed 

Export Licenses to the Congress on the 

dates indicated on the attachments 

pursuant to sections 36(c) and 36(d) and 

in compliance with section 36(f) of the 

Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2776). 

DATES: Effective Date: As shown on each 

of the 24 letters. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert S. Kovac, Managing Director, 

Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, 

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, 

Department of State (202) 663–2861. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

36(f) of the Arms Export Control Act 

mandates that notifications to the 

Congress pursuant to sections 36(c) and 

36(d) must be published in the Federal 

Register when they are transmitted to 

Congress or as soon thereafter as 

practicable. 

July 27, 2009 (Transmittal No. DDTC 010– 

09.) 

Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of 

Representatives. 

Dear Madam Speaker: Pursuant to Section 

36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act, I am 

transmitting, herewith, certification of a 

proposed technical assistance agreement for 

the export of defense articles, including 

technical data, and defense services in the 

amount of $100,000,000 or more. 

The transaction contained in the attached 

certification involves the export of technical 

data, defense services, and defense articles to 

Turkey to perform maintenance and service 

of F110–GE–100 and F110–GE–129 aircraft 

engines installed on Turkish Air Force F–16 

fighter aircraft. 

The United States Government is prepared 

to license the export of these items having 

taken into account political, military, 

economic, human rights and arms control 

considerations. 

More detailed information is contained in 

the formal certification which, though 

unclassified, contains business information 

submitted to the Department of State by the 

applicant, publication of which could cause 

competitive harm to the United States firm 

concerned. 

Sincerely, 

Richard R. Verma, 

Assistant Secretary Legislative Affairs. 

July 27, 2009 (Transmittal No. DDTC 028– 

09.) 

Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of 

Representatives. 

Dear Madam Speaker: Pursuant to Section 

36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act, I am 

transmitting, herewith, certification of a 

proposed export of defense articles or 

defense services in the amount of 

$100,000,000 or more. 

The transaction contained in the attached 

certification involves the export of defense 

articles from the United States to Canada in 

support of the transfer of title of one 

commercial communications satellite to 

Canada. 

The United States Government is prepared 

to license the transfer of these items having 

taken into account political, military, 

economic, human rights and arms control 

considerations. 

More detailed information is contained in 

the formal certification which, though 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES