Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 18793 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 6591] 

Bureau of Educational and Cultural 

Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant 

Proposals: U.S.-Russia Language, 

Technology, Math, and Science 

Program 

Announcement Type: New 

Cooperative Agreement. 

Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/ 

A/S/X–09–04. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Number: 00.000. 

Application Deadline: Application 

Deadline, June 8, 2009 

Executive Summary: The Teacher 

Exchange Branch in the Office of Global 

Educational Programs of the Bureau of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA), 

U.S. Department of State, announces an 

open competition for a Cooperative 

Agreement in the amount of 

approximately $300,000 to support the 

FY 2009 U.S.-Russia Language, 

Technology, Math, and Science 

Program. This program will provide a 

four-week professional development 

program in the U.S. for secondary 

school teachers from Russia, followed 

by a two-week program in Russia for 

U.S. teachers and the Russian educators, 

and a workshop in Russia led by the 

Russian teachers for Russian colleagues. 

U.S. organizations meeting the 

provisions described in Internal 

Revenue Code section 26 501(c)(3) are 

eligible to apply. 

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: The U.S.-Russia Language, 

Technology, Math, and Science Program 

will bring outstanding secondary school 

teachers from Russia to the United 

States to augment their subject area 

teaching skills and knowledge of the 

U.S., as well as provide an opportunity 

for U.S. teachers to participate in a 

professional development program in 

Russia. The overall goals of the program 

are: (1) To enable Russian and U.S. 

teachers to learn from their 

counterparts’ education system and to 

improve classroom teaching in both 

countries through the exchange of ideas 

and expertise; (2) to develop the 

leadership skills of Russian and U.S. 

teachers through seminars and 

workshops in the United States and 

Russia; (3) to give additional visibility to 

the teaching profession in Russia and to 

create among key Russian teaching 

professionals a deeper understanding of 

the U.S., so that they may share their 

experiences of living in the United 

States with students and teachers in 

their home communities in Russia. 

Applicant organizations should seek 

to maximize the number of participants 

through a cost-effective approach to 

program administration. The ratio of 

Russian to U.S. participants should be 

approximately 3:1. 

Proposals should outline six distinct 

program components: 

A. Program publicity, recruitment, 

and selection of teachers in Russia with 

the support of a local office or on-theground partner organization. The 

Department anticipates that recruitment 

will focus on a single Russian region in 

consultation with the Public Affairs 

Section of the U.S. Embassy in Russia, 

and that the region will be one in which 

teachers have had little or no previous 

involvement with exchange 

opportunities. Therefore, proposals 

should explain how an organization’s 

local office or partner organization will 

have the flexibility to undertake a 

limited but highly focused recruitment 

effort in a remote region of Russia. 

B. Program publicity, recruitment, 

and selection of U.S. teachers. 

C. A four-week U.S.-based institute 

during the fall of 2010: the institute 

should support teachers from the 

disciplines of math, science, 

information technology, and English as 

a Foreign Language (EFL) and provide 

two separate sessions: one for teachers 

in EFL and the other for the remaining 

three teaching disciplines. Russian EFL 

teachers participating in the institute 

should have strong written and oral 

English skills as evidenced by an 

institutional TOEFL score of 450 or 

higher on the written test. Russian math, 

science, and information technology 

teachers should be provided with a 

program that includes simultaneous 

translation. All participants should be 

teaching professionals with at least five 

to ten years of experience. 

D. Visit of U.S. teachers to the home 

schools of some of the Russian teachers 

who participated in the U.S. program to 

share best practices during the spring of 

2011; 

E. A one-day professional 

development workshop in Russia led by 

teachers who participated in the U.S. 

program for their Russian colleagues in 

all four teaching disciplines, with 

separate sessions provided for EFL 

teachers and for teachers in the other 

disciplines. 

F. Follow-on and alumni activities. 

Applicants should propose a calendar 

that will include a coherent sequence of 

the various program components within 

the guidelines noted in the Project 

Objectives, Goals, and Implementation 

(POGI) for this RFGP. 

The U.S.-Russia Language, 

Technology, Math, and Science Program 

will be funded through a Cooperative 

Agreement. Please note that in a 

Cooperative Agreement, the Teacher 

Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X) is 

substantially involved in program 

activities above and beyond routine 

monitoring. ECA/A/S/X activities and 

responsibilities for this program are as 

follows: 

• Formulation of program policy; 

• Approval and input on program 

timetables, agendas, and administrative 

procedures; 

• Guidance in execution of all 

program components; 

• Review and approval of all program 

publicity and recruitment materials; 

• Approval of participants; 

• Approval of decisions related to 

special circumstances or problems 

throughout the duration of the program; 

• Approval of follow-on and alumni 

projects; 

• Assistance with participant 

emergencies; and 

• Liaison with the Public Affairs 

Section, U.S. Embassy Moscow. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

Agreement. 

Fiscal Year Funds: 2009. 

Approximate Total Funding: 

$300,000. 

Approximate Number of Awards: 1. 

Approximate Average Award: 

$300,000. 

Anticipated Award Date: September 

15, 2009. 

Anticipated Project Completion Date: 

December 31, 2011. 

Additional Information: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

18794 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 

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 less than four 

years experience in conducting 

international exchanges be limited to 

$60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA 

anticipates making one award, in an 

amount up to $300,000 to support 

program and administrative costs 

required to implement this exchange 

program. Therefore, organizations with 

less 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. 

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 William Heaton in the 

Teacher Exchange Branch, ECA/A/S/X, 

U.S. Department of State, SA–44, 301 

4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, 

telephone: (202) 453–8888, fax: (202) 

453–8890, e-mail: heatonwe@state.gov, 

to request a Solicitation Package. Please 

refer to the Funding Opportunity 

Number ECA/A/S/X–09–04 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 William Heaton, 

Teacher Exchange Branch, and refer to 

the Funding Opportunity Number ECA/ 

A/S/X–09–04 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. 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 18795 

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, record-keeping, reporting and 

other requirements. 

The Bureau requests that the award 

recipient issue DS–2019 forms under a 

Bureau SEVIS program number 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, ECA/EC/ECD—SA–44, 

Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20547, Telephone: 

(202) 203–5029, FAX: (202) 453–8640. 

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 

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. There must be a summary 

budget as well as breakdowns reflecting 

both administrative and program 

budgets. Applicants may provide 

separate sub-budgets for each program 

component, phase, location, or activity 

to provide clarification. It is anticipated 

that funding for the cooperative 

agreement for program administration 

will be approximately $300,000. Please 

refer to the Solicitation Package for 

complete budget guidelines and 

formatting instructions. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

18796 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 

IV.3F. Application Deadline and 

Methods of Submission 

Application Deadline Date: June 8, 

2009. 

Reference Number: ECA/A/S/X–09– 

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 webportal as 

part of the Recovery Act stimulus package. 

As stated in these RFGPs, 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 five copies of the 

application should be sent to: U.S. 

Department of State, SA–44, Bureau of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: 

ECA/A/S/X–09–04, Program 

Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 

301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20547. 

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 disk. The Bureau will 

provide these files electronically to the 

Public Affairs Section at the U.S. 

embassy in Moscow for its review. 

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 

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 website, 

for definitions of various ‘‘application 

statuses’’ and the difference between a 

submission receipt and a submission 

validation. Applicants will receive a 

validation e-mail from grants.gov upon 

the successful submission of an 

application. Again, validation of an 

electronic submission via Grants.gov 

can take up to two business days. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend that 

you not wait until the application 

deadline to begin the submission 

process through Grants.gov. ECA will 

not notify you upon receipt of electronic 

applications. 

It is the responsibility of all 

applicants submitting proposals via the 

Grants.gov web portal to ensure that 

proposals have been received by 

Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA 

bears no responsibility for data errors 

resulting from transmission or 

conversion processes. 

IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of 

Applications: Executive Order 12372 

does not apply to this program. 

V. Application Review Information 

V.1. Review Process 

The Bureau will review all proposals 

for technical eligibility. Proposals will 

be deemed ineligible if they do not fully 

adhere to the guidelines stated herein 

and in the Solicitation Package. All 

eligible proposals will be reviewed by 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 18797 

the program office, as well as the Public 

Diplomacy section overseas, where 

appropriate. Eligible proposals will be 

subject to compliance with Federal and 

Bureau regulations and guidelines and 

forwarded to Bureau grant panels for 

advisory review. Proposals may also be 

reviewed by the Office of the Legal 

Adviser or by other Department 

elements. Final funding decisions are at 

the discretion of the Department of 

State’s Assistant Secretary for 

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final 

technical authority for assistance 

awards cooperative agreements resides 

with the Bureau’s Grants Officer. 

Review Criteria 

Technically eligible applications will 

be competitively reviewed according to 

the criteria stated below. These criteria 

are not rank ordered and all carry equal 

weight in the proposal evaluation: 

1. Quality of the program idea: 

Proposals should exhibit originality, 

substance, precision, and relevance to 

the Bureau’s mission. 

2. Program planning: Detailed agenda 

and relevant work plan should 

demonstrate substantive undertakings 

and logistical capacity. Agenda and plan 

should adhere to the program overview 

and guidelines described above. 

3. Ability to achieve program 

objectives: Objectives should be 

reasonable, feasible, and flexible. 

Proposals should clearly demonstrate 

how the institution will meet the 

program’s objectives and plan. 

4. Institutional Capacity: Proposed 

personnel and institutional resources 

should be adequate and appropriate to 

achieve the program or project’s goals. 

5. Support of Diversity: Proposals 

should demonstrate substantive support 

of the Bureau’s policy on diversity. 

Achievable and relevant features should 

be cited in both program administration 

(selection of participants, program 

venue and program evaluation) and 

program content (orientation and wrapup sessions, program meetings, resource 

materials and follow-up activities). 

6. Follow-on Activities: Proposals 

should provide a plan for continued 

follow-on activity (without Bureau 

support) ensuring that Bureau 

supported programs are not isolated 

events. 

7. Cost-effectiveness/Cost-sharing: 

The overhead and administrative 

components of the proposal, including 

salaries and honoraria, should be kept 

as low as possible. All other items 

should be necessary and appropriate. 

Proposals should maximize cost-sharing 

through other private sector support as 

well as institutional direct funding 

contributions. 

VI. Award Administration Information 

VI.1. Award Notices 

Final awards cannot be made until 

funds have been appropriated by 

Congress, allocated and committed 

through internal Bureau procedures. 

Successful applicants will receive 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. 

VI.2. Administrative and National 

Policy Requirements 

Terms and Conditions for the 

Administration of ECA agreements 

include the following: 

Office of Management and Budget 

Circular A–122, ‘‘Cost Principles for 

Nonprofit Organizations.’’ 

Office of Management and Budget 

Circular A–21, ‘‘Cost Principles for 

Educational Institutions.’’ 

OMB Circular A–87, ‘‘Cost Principles 

for State, Local and Indian 

Governments’’. 

OMB Circular No. A–110 (Revised), 

Uniform Administrative Requirements 

for Grants and Agreements with 

Institutions of Higher Education, 

Hospitals, and other Nonprofit 

Organizations. 

OMB Circular No. A–102, Uniform 

Administrative Requirements for 

Grants-in-Aid to State and Local 

Governments. 

OMB Circular No. A–133, Audits of 

States, Local Government, and Nonprofit Organizations. 

Please reference the following 

websites for additional information: 

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 two copies of the 

following reports: 

(1) A final program and financial 

report no more than 90 days after the 

expiration of the award; 

(2) A concise, one-page final program 

report summarizing program outcomes 

no more than 90 days after the 

expiration of the award. This one-page 

report will be transmitted to OMB, and 

be made available to the public via 

OMB’s USAspending.gov Web site—as 

part of ECA’s Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act 

(FFATA) reporting requirements. 

(3) A SF–PPR, ‘‘Performance Progress 

Report’’ Cover Sheet with all program 

reports. 

(4) Quarterly program and financial 

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. 

VI.4. Program Data Requirements 

Award recipients will be required to 

maintain specific data on program 

participants and activities in an 

electronically accessible database format 

that can be shared with the Bureau as 

required. As a minimum, the data must 

include the following: 

(1) Name, address, contact 

information and biographic sketch of all 

persons who travel internationally on 

funds provided by the agreement or who 

benefit from the award funding but do 

not travel. 

(2) Itineraries of international and 

domestic travel, providing dates of 

travel and cities in which any exchange 

experiences take place. Final schedules 

for in-country and U.S. activities must 

be received by the ECA Program Officer 

at least three work days prior to the 

official opening of the activity. 

VII. Agency Contacts 

For questions about this 

announcement, contact: William 

Heaton, Teacher Exchange Branch, 

ECA/A/S/X, U.S. Department of State, 

SA–44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 349, 

Washington, DC 20547, phone: (202) 

453–8888, fax: (202) 453–8890, e-mail: 

heatonwe@state.gov. 

All correspondence with the Bureau 

concerning this RFGP should reference 

the above title and number ECA/A/S/X– 

09–04. 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

18798 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 78 / Friday, April 24, 2009 / Notices 

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: April 17, 2009. 

C. Miller Crouch, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, for Educational 

and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. E9–9350 Filed 4–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 6590] 

Inclusion of Expiration Dates in 

Presidential Permits for International 

Border Crossings 

SUMMARY: The Department of State 

announces, in consultation with 

relevant Federal agencies, that it will 

include an expiration date among the 

conditions it establishes in Presidential 

permits that it issues for the 

construction, operation, and 

maintenance of border crossing 

facilities. Based on the Department’s 

experience and on interagency 

consultations, the Department intends 

to provide for the expiration of permits 

for vehicular border crossings (i.e., 

crossings for cars, trucks, buses, and 

trains) ten (10) years after issuance 

unless the permittee notifies the 

Department within that timeframe that 

construction has begun, and for the 

expiration of permits for all other border 

crossing facilities (e.g., pipelines, 

conveyor belts, pedestrian crossings, 

etc.) five (5) years after issuance unless 

the permittee notifies the Department 

within that timeframe that construction 

has begun. The Department believes that 

this provision provides sufficient time 

for viable projects to move forward 

while preventing unexecuted permits 

from creating needless uncertainty and/ 

or hindering the development of worthy 

projects that would better serve the 

national interest. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Daniel Darrach, U.S.-Mexico Border 

Affairs Coordinator, via e-mail at WHABorderAffairs@state.gov; by phone at 

202–647–9894; or by mail at Office of 

Mexican Affairs—Room 3909, 

Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., 

Washington, DC 20520. Information 

about Presidential permits is available at 

http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rt/permit/. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive 

Order (EO) 11423 of August 16, 1968, as 

amended, authorizes the Secretary of 

State to issue Presidential permits for 

the construction, connection, operation, 

and maintenance of facilities crossing 

the international borders of the United 

States, including, but not limited to, 

bridges and pipelines connecting the 

United States with Canada or Mexico. 

EO 13337, dated April 30, 2004, 

amended EO 11423, inter alia, by 

expanding the Presidential permit 

program to include at-grade land border 

crossings. In order to issue a 

Presidential permit, the Secretary or her 

delegate must find that a border crossing 

is in the U.S. national interest. Within 

the context of appropriate border 

security, safety, health, and 

environmental requirements, it is in the 

U.S. national interest to facilitate the 

efficient movement of legitimate goods 

and travelers across U.S. borders. 

Since 1968, the Department has 

issued 21 Presidential permits for nonpipeline border crossings on the U.S.- 

Mexico border and one for the U.S.- 

Canada border. Of the 21 U.S.-Mexican 

border projects that have received 

permits, most began construction within 

two to five years. One permitted project 

took 16 years to be built, one is under 

construction nearly 30 years after 

receiving a permit, and three are not 

likely to be built although they have had 

permits more than 10 years (one of these 

permits is more than 30 years old). 

These permits were issued to the City of 

Mission, Texas (1978), the Union Pacific 

Railroad Company (1995), and the 

Brownsville Navigation District (1997). 

The Department is currently evaluating 

whether it should revoke these permits, 

given the change of circumstances in 

each of the project areas, development 

of nearby projects, inaction by the 

permittees on the proposed projects, 

and lack of interest in pursuing the 

corresponding projects in Mexico. 

The Presidential permit process, 

which emphasizes interagency and 

binational coordination, is designed to 

ensure that border crossings are built if 

and only if there is clear local, 

binational, and interagency support for 

the project and construction is in the 

U.S. national interest. It is not in the 

U.S. national interest to commit scarce 

government resources (e.g., Customs 

and Border Protection inspectors, 

highway improvement funds, etc.) as 

well as private resources (e.g., land, 

capital, etc.) for border crossing projects 

that cannot be successfully 

implemented within a reasonable time 

period. The lapse of time may have an 

impact on the Department’s national 

interest determination. While the 

Department may find a project to be in 

the U.S. national interest under a certain 

set of circumstances in one period, 

those circumstances may change over 

time so that five or ten years later, the 

Department may conclude that the 

project is no longer in the U.S. national 

interest or that the relevant agencies 

should reconsider their 

recommendations on the Department’s 

initial grant of the permit. Border 

regions are dynamic and fast-changing 

and it is important that an outdated 

permit not be used to build a border 

crossing on a site that is no longer 

appropriate for a crossing due to the 

lapse of time (e.g., due to changes in 

transportation patterns, development 

patterns, etc.). 

At the same time, the Department 

recognizes that, by their nature, border 

crossing projects are complex, time 

consuming, and subject to political, 

financial, regulatory, and logistical 

setbacks. It is unrealistic to expect 

permits to be implemented instantly 

and it would be inefficient to set permit 

expiration dates on such a short 

timeframe that the relevant agencies are 

required to review them repeatedly 

while waiting for construction to begin. 

The Department has determined, after 

consulting with relevant Federal 

agencies, including the Border 

Facilitation Working Group, and giving 

the matter careful consideration, that 

Presidential permits for vehicular 

border crossings (for cars, trucks, buses, 

and trains) will be valid for a period of 

ten (10) years, while permits for all 

other border crossing facilities (e.g., 

pipelines, conveyor belts, pedestrian 

crossings, etc.) will be valid for a period 

of five (5) years. In the Department’s 

experience, vehicular border crossings 

typically involve intricate coordination 

among numerous agencies and often use 

Federal financing that is not 

immediately available, whereas other 

border crossing projects are generally 

smaller in scale, less expensive, and 

dependent on private financing that is 

more readily available. The Department 

intends to tie the expiration condition 

in the permit to the date the permit is 

signed and expects that this expiration 

condition will be satisfied by the 

permittee’s notice to the Department 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES