Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 69795 

5The Commission has considered the proposed 

rule’s impact on efficiency, competition and capital 

formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

6 15 U.S.C. 78o–3(b)(5). 

7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

8 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). 

9 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

organization.5 Specifically, the 

Commission believes that the proposed 

rule change is consistent with Section 

15A(b)(5) of the Act,6 which requires 

that the rules of the self-regulatory 

organization provide for the equitable 

allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and 

other charges among members and 

issuers and other persons using any 

facilities or system which it operates or 

controls. 

The Commission notes that this 

proposal would retroactively modify 

pricing for non-NASD members using 

the Nasdaq’s Brut Facility to be 

implemented as of November 1, 2005. 

This proposal would permit the 

schedule for non-NASD members to 

mirror the schedule applicable to NASD 

members that became effective October 

26, 2005, pursuant to SR–NASD–2005–

125 and that Nasdaq stated it would 

implement on November 1, 2005. 

The Commission finds good cause for 

approving the proposed rule change 

prior to the 30th day of the date of 

publication of the notice thereof in the 

Federal Register. The Commission notes 

that the proposed fees for non-NASD 

members are identical to those in SR–

NASD–2005–125, which implemented 

those fees for NASD members and 

which became effective as of October 

26, 2005. The Commission notes that 

this change will promote consistency in 

Nasdaq’s fee schedule by applying the 

same pricing schedule with the same 

date of effectiveness for both NASD 

members and non-NASD members. 

Therefore, the Commission finds that 

there is good cause, consistent with 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,7 to approve 

the proposed change on an accelerated 

basis. 

V. Conclusion 

It is therefore ordered, pursuant to 

Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,8 that the 

proposed rule change (File No. SR–

NASD–2005–126), is approved on an 

accelerated basis. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 

authority.9

Jonathan G. Katz, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E5–6356 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8010–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice 5230] 

Bureau of Educational and Cultural 

Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant 

Proposals: FY 2006 Eurasia/South Asia 

Teaching Excellence and Achievement 

Program 

Announcement Type: New 

Cooperative Agreement. 

Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/ 

A/S/X–06–02. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Number: 00.000. 

Key Dates: Application Deadline, 

January 12, 2006. 

Executive Summary: The Fulbright 

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 an 

assistance award in the amount of 

$2,750,000 to support the FY 2006 

Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence 

and Achievement Program, a series of 

concurrent six- to seven-week 

professional enrichment programs in the 

U.S. for outstanding secondary-level 

teachers from selected countries in 

Eurasia and South Asia, followed by 

subsequent programs involving U.S. 

teachers with the Eurasian and South 

Asian teachers in their countries. 

Applicant organizations should be 

prepared to conduct recruitment and 

accommodate participants from the 

following countries: Armenia, 

Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, 

Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, 

Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, 

Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri 

Lanka. During the course of this twoyear program, approximately 136 

teachers of English as a Foreign 

Language (EFL) and the social sciences 

in groups of 20 to 25 teachers in each 

cohort will take part in U.S.-based 

professional development institutes to 

learn new teaching methodologies and 

approaches to curriculum development 

through workshops, seminars and, 

where possible, team-teaching in 

secondary-level classes with U.S. 

mentor teachers. 

Approximately 36 outstanding U.S. 

teachers will subsequently travel to 

Eurasia and South Asia to take part in 

shorter programs with their Eurasian/ 

South Asian counterparts. 

To build on the achievements of the 

exchange visits, small grants will be 

awarded to individual foreign and U.S. 

teacher alumni in support of follow-on 

projects. 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Authority: Overall grant making 

authority for this program is contained 

in the Mutual Educational and Cultural 

Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87–

256, as amended, also known as the 

Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the 

Act is ‘‘to enable the Government of the 

United States to increase mutual 

understanding between the people of 

the United States and the people of 

other countries * * *; to strengthen the 

ties which unite us with other nations 

by demonstrating the educational and 

cultural interests, developments, and 

achievements of the people of the 

United States and other nations * * * 

and thus to assist in the development of 

friendly, sympathetic and peaceful 

relations between the United States and 

the other countries of the world.’’ The 

funding authority for the program above 

is provided through legislation. 

Purpose: Overview: The Eurasia/ 

South Asia Teaching Excellence and 

Achievement Program will expand the 

impact of the former Teaching 

Excellence Awards Program by bringing 

outstanding secondary school teachers 

from Eurasia and South Asia to the 

United States to augment their subject 

area teaching skills and knowledge of 

the U.S. The goals of the program are: 

(1) To contribute to the improvement 

and status of teaching in the 

participating countries; (2) to create 

resident experts on the U.S. in schools 

across the regions; (3) to develop longlasting partnerships and mutual 

understanding between American and 

international teachers and their 

students; and (4) to provide 

opportunities for under-served foreign 

populations, especially women, to 

develop their leadership skills. 

Proposals should outline three 

distinct program components: 

A. A total of six six- to seven-week 

U.S.-based institutes (each comprising a 

group of 20 to 25 teachers from Eurasia 

and South Asia), three of which should 

occur concurrently in summer or fall of 

2006, and three of which should occur 

concurrently in summer or fall of 2007; 

B. Visits of four cohorts of U.S. 

teachers (two cohorts to each region) 

during the 2006–07 and 2007–08 

academic years to reciprocate the visits 

of the Eurasian and South Asian 

teachers to the U.S.; and 

C. Follow-on grants. 

Applicant organizations should 

propose a calendar that will include a 

coherent sequence of program 

components for each of the two program 

years. Although the number of 

participants may be greater in the 

second year than the first, each year’s 

69796 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 

program should include both 

participating regions. 

A. Professional Development Institutes 

The institutes should be based at 

competitively selected Schools of 

Education at U.S. universities. The 

assignment of teachers to U.S. host 

campuses will be made based on the 

similarity of candidates’ qualifications 

and their English proficiency. The 

grantee organization should administer 

an open sub-grant competition among 

U.S. schools of education to host a 

cohort of international teachers. 

Institutions that perform well in the first 

year may host a cohort of teachers in the 

second year as well. 

In the first year of program activity, 

the grantee organization should arrange 

a three-day orientation program in 

Washington, DC, for all three cohorts of 

international teachers. Then, the 

international participants will travel to 

the U.S. host universities for the six-to 

seven-week institute. The program will 

conclude with a three-day end-ofprogram conference and debriefing 

session at one of the host universities 

for all of the international and U.S. 

participant teachers in the first year’s 

cohort. This schedule should repeat in 

the second year of activity. In each year 

of program activity, the institutes 

should provide: 

(1) English language instruction, if 

necessary; 

(2) Intensive training in the Teaching 

of English as a Foreign Language (or in 

the teaching of one of the social 

sciences, depending on the 

specializations of the participants) and 

teaching methodologies; 

(3) Training in the use of computers 

for Internet and word processing and as 

tools for teaching EFL or other 

coursework; 

(4) Consultations with leading U.S. 

teacher training and curriculum 

development specialists and 

practitioners and, to the extent possible, 

school visits and collaborations with 

U.S. teachers on teaching and observing 

a variety of teaching methods (inquiry, 

active classroom, group projects, etc.); 

(5) Individual and group work periods 

for research and curriculum writing 

activities; 

(6) Involvement with Americans at 

civic and volunteer organizations, at 

school board meetings, parent-teacher 

conferences or other community and 

cultural activities, and through short 

home stays. 

Participants in the institutes should 

be younger teaching professionals with 

five or more years of experience and 

strong written and oral English skills. 

Teachers will be selected primarily from 

the discipline of English as a Foreign 

Language, with teachers of social 

sciences (including social studies, 

civics, and history) also eligible. 

Both for Eurasia and South Asia, 

applicant organizations should propose 

creative, cost-efficient recruitment and 

selection strategies involving a 

combination of partner organizations, 

branch offices, or other cooperating 

agencies to attract qualified teachers to 

the program. The recruitment strategy 

should attract a sufficient number of 

applicants to ensure a pool of highly 

qualified candidates, while limiting the 

number that will not be accepted. We 

anticipate 200 nominations from 

international partner organizations for 

each year of the program cycle. 

Applicant organizations are invited to 

suggest, based on their experience and 

knowledge, appropriate grant-toapplicant ratios that should be targeted 

in the recruitment effort. Applicants 

should identify field offices or other 

local partner organizations and 

individuals with whom they propose to 

collaborate, and should describe in 

detail previous projects undertaken by 

the organization(s) or individual(s). 

Please include letters of project 

commitment from all partners. A subgrant agreement and an accompanying 

budget are required if an applicant 

partners with another organization. 

Please include this documentation with 

your proposal submission. 

In Eurasia and South Asia the grantee 

organization, together with all local 

partners, should collaborate with the 

Regional English Language Officers 

(RELO) for Eurasia and South Asia, who 

are based at the U.S. Embassies in Kiev, 

Tashkent, and New Delhi. The RELOs 

will be encouraged to participate in 

reviewing applications, interviewing 

and nominating candidates, and the 

approval and monitoring of follow-up 

activities. 

In all cases, the top candidates’

applications will be submitted to the 

grantee organization, which should 

organize external peer review panels to 

help determine the final selection of 

candidates in collaboration with ECA. 

ECA’s role is to ensure that these 

programs help support U.S. foreign 

policy goals. 

B. Reciprocal Visits 

The program will provide two-week 

reciprocal visits to Eurasia and South 

Asia for a total of 36 U.S. teachers 

during the course of the program. The 

visits should feature the sharing of best 

practices, team-teaching with 

counterparts abroad, teacher-training, 

seminars on regional educational topics, 

and opportunities to learn from regional 

master teachers about teaching styles, 

curriculum, and educational issues in 

the host country. The grantee 

organization should invite applications 

from outstanding and, preferably, 

award-winning U.S. teachers and, in 

consultation with the Fulbright Teacher 

Exchange Branch (ECA/A/S/X), should 

select approximately thirty-six for 

participation over the course of two 

program cycles. These U.S. teachers will 

join their Eurasian and South Asian 

counterparts for the U.S.-based 

conference and debriefing session in the 

summer or fall preceding their 

reciprocal visits to Eurasia or South 

Asia in fall 2006/winter 2007 or fall 

2007/winter 2008. The grantee 

organization should work with ECA/A/ 

S/X and international counterparts to 

identify and arrange host placements in 

Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. 

teachers. 

C. Follow-On Programming 

The third component, which will take 

place after the international participants 

return home, is follow-on programming. 

International teachers will be eligible to 

apply for small grants after the program 

ends, to purchase essential materials for 

their schools, to offer follow-on training 

for other teachers, and to conduct other 

activities that will build on the 

exchange visits. The development and 

approval of follow-on grants must be 

coordinated by the grantee organization 

with the relevant non-governmental 

organizations, Fulbright Commissions, 

U.S. Embassies in Eurasia and South 

Asia (including RELOs, where 

appropriate), and the Fulbright Teacher 

Exchange Branch. The possible range of 

follow-on programs across Eurasia and 

South Asia includes organizing teacher 

training workshops (in such areas as 

EFL or tolerance education), donating 

books and school supplies, and opening 

a teacher resource center. Applicant 

organizations’ proposals should allot a 

total of $40,000 ($20,000 after each 

program cycle) to fund approximately 

10 or 12 small grants. 

The Bureau will work with the 

recipient of this cooperative agreement 

award on administrative and program 

issues and questions as they arise over 

the duration of the award. 

Program Planning and Implementation 

Applicant organizations are requested 

to submit a narrative outlining a 

comprehensive strategy for the 

administration and implementation of 

the Eurasia/South Asia Teaching 

Excellence and Achievement Program. 

The narrative should include a 

proposed design for the institutes and 

the reciprocal visits by U.S. teachers, a 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 69797 

strategy for selecting university hosts 

and for cooperating with them through 

subgrants, a plan for recruiting, 

selecting, and placing applicants from 

Eurasia and South Asia for the U.S. 

institutes, a plan for monitoring the 

teachers’ academic and professional 

programs, a plan to identify U.S. 

teachers and the Eurasian/South Asian 

teachers who will host them, a plan to 

assess and improve the program based 

on experience with the first program 

cycle, and a proposal for alumni 

programming follow-on support. 

Employees of the grantee organization 

will be named Alternate Responsible 

Officers and will be responsible for 

issuing DS–2019 forms to participants 

on behalf of the Teacher Exchange 

Branch (ECA/A/S/X) and performing all 

actions to comply with the Student and 

Exchange Visitor Information System 

(SEVIS). 

The comprehensive program strategy 

should reflect a vision for the Program 

as a whole, interpreting the goals of the 

Teaching Excellence and Achievement 

Program with creativity and providing 

innovative ideas for the Program. The 

strategy should include a description of 

how the various components of the 

Program will be integrated to build 

upon and reinforce one another. 

Pending availability of funds, this grant 

should begin on March 1, 2006, and will 

run through June 30, 2008. 

In a cooperative agreement, ECA’s 

Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch 

(ECA/A/S/X) will be substantially 

involved in program activities above 

and beyond routine grant monitoring. 

ECA/A/S/X activities and 

responsibilities for this program are as 

follows: 

• Formulation of program policy; 

• Clearing texts and program 

guidelines for publication; 

• Establishing which countries are 

eligible and the number of participants 

from each country; 

• Approval of recruitment 

mechanisms; 

• Review and approval of universitybased programs and enhancement 

activities for the teachers such as the 

Washington, DC, orientation and the 

end-of-program conference/debriefing; 

• Oversight of selection of U.S. and 

international teacher participants and 

alumni awards. 

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: 2006. 

Approximate Total Funding: 

$2,750,000. 

Approximate Number of Awards: 1. 

Approximate Average Award: 

Pending availability of funds, 

$2,750,000. This would include 

$1,500,000 in FY 2005 ECA resources 

and $1,250,000 in FY 2006 ECA 

resources, pending a FY 2006 

appropriation. 

Anticipated Award Date: Pending 

availability of funds, March 1, 2006. 

Anticipated Project Completion Date: 

June 30, 2008. 

Additional Information: Pending 

successful implementation of this 

program and the availability of funds in 

subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA’s 

intent to renew this grant for two 

additional fiscal 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 grant 

agreement. Cost sharing may be in the 

form of allowable direct or indirect 

costs. For accountability, applicants 

must maintain written records to 

support all costs, which are claimed as 

their 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 

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 issuing 

one award in an amount up to 

$2,750,000 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 Federal 

Register 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 Patricia Mosley of the 

Fulbright Teacher Exchange Branch, 

ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. Department 

of State, SA–44, 301 4th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20547, telephone: 

(202)453–8897, fax (202)453–8890, email: MosleyPJ@state.gov to request a 

Solicitation Package. Please refer to the 

Funding Opportunity Number ECA/A/ 

S/X–06–02 when making your request. 

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. 

IV.2. To Download a Solicitation 

Package Via Internet 

The entire Solicitation Package may 

be downloaded from the Bureau’s 

website at http://exchanges.state.gov/ 

education/rfgps/menu.htm. Please read 

all information before downloading. 

IV.3. Content and Form of Submission 

Applicants must follow all 

instructions in the Solicitation Package. 

The original and seven copies of the 

application should be sent per the 

instructions under IV.3e. ‘‘Submission 

Dates and Times 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 

69798 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 

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. 

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 is 

placing renewed emphasis on the secure 

and proper administration of Exchange 

Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence 

by grantees 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, record-keeping, reporting and 

other requirements. 

An employee of the Bureau will be 

named the Responsible Officer for the 

program; employees of the grantee 

organization will be named Alternate 

Responsible Officers and will be 

responsible for issuing DS–2019 forms 

to participants and performing all 

actions to comply with the Student and 

Exchange Visitor Information System 

(SEVIS). 

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) 401–9810, FAX: (202) 401–9809. 

Please refer to Solicitation Package for 

further information. 

IV.3.d.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, socio-economic 

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.3.d.3. Program Monitoring and 

Evaluation. Proposals must include a 

plan to monitor and evaluate the 

project’s success, both as the activities 

unfold and at the end of the program. 

The Bureau recommends that your 

proposal include a draft survey 

questionnaire or other technique plus a 

description of a methodology to use to 

link outcomes to original project 

objectives. The Bureau expects that the 

grantee will track participants and 

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, how 

and when you intend to measure these 

outcomes (performance indicators), and 

how these outcomes relate to the above 

goals. 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 of teachers to apply knowledge 

in home schools and community; 

interpretation and explanation of 

experiences and new knowledge gained 

to school administrators and other 

colleagues; continued contacts between 

participants and others. 

4. Institutional changes influencing 

policy improvement, 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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 69799 

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.) 

ECA/A/S/X and the Bureau’s Office of 

Policy and Evaluation will work with 

the recipient of this cooperative 

agreement to develop appropriate 

evaluation goals and performance 

indicators. 

Grantees 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.3.d.4. Describe your plans for 

staffing: Please provide a staffing plan 

which outlines the responsibilities of 

each staff person and explains which 

staff member will be accountable for 

each program responsibility. Wherever 

possible please streamline 

administrative processes. 

IV.3e. Please take the following 

information into consideration when 

preparing your budget: 

IV.3.e.1. Applicants must submit a 

comprehensive budget for the program. 

The budget should not exceed 

$2,750,000 for program and 

administrative costs. There must be a 

summary budget as well as breakdowns 

reflecting both administrative and 

program budgets for host campus and 

foreign teacher involvement in the 

program. Applicants should provide 

separate sub-budgets for the summer 

institutes, reciprocal visits by U.S. 

teachers, and the follow-on grant 

component. 

The summary and detailed 

administrative and program budgets 

should be accompanied by a narrative 

which provides a brief rationale for each 

line item including a methodology for 

estimating appropriate average 

maintenance allowance levels and 

tuition costs for the participants, the 

number that can be accommodated at 

the levels proposed. The total 

administrative costs funded by the 

Bureau must be reasonable and 

appropriate. 

IV.3.e.2. Allowable costs for the 

program and additional budget guidance 

are outlined in detail in the POGI 

document. 

Please refer to the Solicitation 

Package for complete budget guidelines 

and formatting instructions. 

IV.3f. Submission Dates and Times. 

Application Deadline Date: Thursday, 

January 12, 2006. 

Explanation of Deadlines: Due to 

heightened security measures, proposal 

submissions must be sent via a 

nationally recognized overnight delivery 

service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, 

Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service 

Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be 

shipped no later than the above 

deadline. The 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. 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. ECA will not notify you upon 

receipt of application. 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. Applications may not be 

submitted electronically at this time. 

Applicants must follow all 

instructions in the Solicitation Package. 

Important note: When preparing your 

submission please make sure to include one 

extra copy of the completed SF–424 form and 

place it in an envelope addressed to ‘‘ECA/ 

EX/PM’’. 

The original and seven copies of the 

application should be sent to: U.S. 

Department of State, SA–44, Bureau of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: 

ECA/A/S/X–06–02, Program 

Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 

301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20547. 

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.3g. Intergovernmental Review of 

Applications: Executive Order 12372 

does not apply to this program. 

V. Application Review Information 

V.1. Review Process 

The Bureau will review all proposals 

for technical eligibility. Proposals will 

be deemed ineligible if they do not fully 

adhere to the guidelines stated herein 

and in the Solicitation Package. All 

eligible proposals will be reviewed by 

the program office, as well as the Public 

Diplomacy section overseas, where 

appropriate. Eligible proposals will be 

subject to compliance with Federal and 

Bureau regulations and guidelines and 

forwarded to Bureau grant panels for 

advisory review. Proposals may also be 

reviewed by the Office of the Legal 

Adviser or by other Department 

elements. Final funding decisions are at 

the discretion of the Department of 

State’s Assistant Secretary for 

Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final 

technical authority for assistance 

awards (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. Program Development and 

Management: The proposal narrative 

should exhibit originality, substance, 

precision, and relevance to the Bureau’s 

mission as well as the objectives of the 

Eurasia/South Asia Teaching Excellence 

and Achievement Program. It should 

include an effective program plan and 

demonstrate how the distribution of 

administrative resources will ensure 

adequate attention to program 

administration, including host 

institution selection. 

2. Multiplier effect/impact: The 

proposed administrative strategy should 

maximize the program’s potential to 

build on the participants’ training upon 

their return to their countries. 

3. 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, resource materials and 

follow-up activities). 

4. Institutional Capacity and Record: 

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. 

Proposed personnel and institutional 

resources should be adequate and 

appropriate to achieve the program’s 

goals. 

5. Follow-on and Alumni Activities: 

Proposals should provide a plan for 

continued follow-on activity (both with 

69800 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices 

and without Bureau support) ensuring 

that the Teaching Excellence and 

Achievement Program training is not an 

isolated event. Activities should include 

tracking and maintaining updated lists 

of all alumni and facilitating follow-up 

activities for alumni. 

6. Project Evaluation: Proposals 

should include a plan and methodology 

to evaluate the Teaching Excellence and 

Achievement Program’s degree of 

success in meeting program objectives, 

both as the activities unfold, at the end 

of the first program iteration, and at 

their conclusion. Draft survey 

questionnaires or other techniques plus 

description of methodologies to use to 

link outcomes to original project 

objectives are recommended. Successful 

applicants will be expected to submit 

intermediate reports after each project 

component is concluded, or quarterly, 

whichever is less frequent. 

7. Cost-effectiveness and 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.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 an 

Assistance Award Document (AAD) 

from the Bureau’s Grants Office. The 

AAD and the original grant proposal 

with subsequent modifications (if 

applicable) shall be the only binding 

authorizing document between the 

recipient and the U.S. Government. The 

AAD 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 Web 

sites for additional information: http:// 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants.; 

http://exchanges.state.gov/education/ 

grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI. 

VI.3. Reporting Requirements 

You must provide ECA with a hard 

copy original plus one copy of the 

following reports: 

Quarterly financial reports; Annual 

program reports for the first and second 

year of the agreement; and final program 

and financial report no more than 90 

days after the expiration of the award. 

Grantees 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: Michael Kuban, 

Office of Global Educational Programs, 

ECA/A/S/X, Room 349, U.S. Department 

of State, SA–44, 301 4th Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20547, telephone: 202–

453–8878, fax: 202–453–8890, 

KubanMM@state.gov. 

All correspondence with the Bureau 

concerning this RFGP should reference 

the title and number ECA/A/S/X–06–02. 

Please read the complete Federal 

Register 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. 

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: November 9, 2005. 

C. Miller Crouch, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 05–22804 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–05–U 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

Publication of the Tier 2 Tax Rates 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Publication of the tier 2 tax 

rates for calendar year 2006 as required 

by section 3241(d) of the Internal 

Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. section 3241). 

Tier 2 taxes on railroad employees, 

employers, and employee 

representatives are one source of 

funding for benefits under the Railroad 

Retirement Act. 

DATES: The tier 2 tax rates for calendar 

year 2006 apply to compensation paid 

in calendar year 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ligeia M. Donis, CC:TEGE:EOEG:ET1, 

Internal Revenue Service, 1111 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20224, Telephone Number (202) 

622–0047 (not a toll-free number). 

TIER 2 TAX RATES: The tier 2 tax 

rate for 2006 under section 3201(b) on 

employees is 4.4 percent of 

compensation. The tier 2 tax rate for 

2006 under section 3221(b) on 

employers is 12.6 percent of 

compensation. The tier 2 tax rate for 

2006 under section 3211(b) on employee 

representatives is 12.6 percent of 

compensation.