65444 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service

7 CFR Part 3405

Higher Education Challenge Grants

Program; Administrative Provisions

AGENCY: Cooperative State Research,

Education, and Extension Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension

Service (CSREES) proposes to add a new

Part 3405 to title 7, subtitle B, Chapter

XXXIV of the Code of Federal

Regulations, for the purpose of

administering Higher Education

Challenge Grants Program conducted

under the authority of section 1417(b)(1)

of the National Agriculture Research,

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of

1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3152). This

action establishes and codifies the

administrative procedures to be

followed annually in the solicitation of

competitive proposals, the evaluation of

such proposals, and the award of grants

under this program.

DATES: Written comments are invited

from interested individuals and

organizations. To be considered in the

formulation of a final rule, comments

must be received on or before January

18, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to

Dr. Jeffrey L. Gilmore, Higher Education

Grant Programs Manager, Science and

Education Resources Development,

Cooperative State Research, Education,

and Extension Service, U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Ag Box 2251,

Washington, DC 20250–2251.

Comments may also be sent via

electronic mail to jgilmore@reeusda.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Jeffrey L. Gilmore at 202–720–1973

(voice), 202–720–2030 (fax) or via

electronic mail at jgilmore@reeusda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Reduction

Under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as

amended (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the

collection of information requirements

contained in this proposed rule have

been reviewed and approved by the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) and given the OMB Document

Nos. 0524–0022, 0524–0024, and 0524–

0030. The public reporting burden for

the information collections contained in

these regulations (Forms CSRS–663,

CSRS–708, CSRS–711, CSRS–712, and

CSRS–713 as well as the Proposal

Summary and Proposal Narrative) is

estimated to be 391⁄2 hours per response,

including the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection of information.

Send comments regarding this burden

estimate or any other aspect of this

collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing this burden, to

the Department of Agriculture,

Clearance Analyst, OIRM, Ag Box 7630,

Washington, DC 20250–7630, and to the

Office of Management and Budget,

Paperwork Reduction Project,

Washington, DC 20503.

Executive Order No. 12866

This proposed rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order No. 12866, and

it has been determined that it is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ rule

because it will not have an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or more

or adversely and materially affect a

sector of the economy, productivity,

competition, jobs, the environment,

public health or safety, or State, local,

or tribal governments or communities.

This rule will not create any serious

inconsistencies or otherwise interfere

with actions taken or planned by

another agency. It will not materially

alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs, or the rights and obligations

of recipients thereof, and does not raise

novel legal or policy issues arising out

of legal mandates, the President’s

priorities, or principles set forth in

Executive Order No. 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Administrator, CSREES, certifies

that this proposed rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities as defined in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Pub. L.

96–534, as amended (5 U.S.C. 601 et

seq.).

Executive Order No. 12612

This rule involves no policies that

have federalism implications under

Executive Order No. 12612, Federalism,

dated October 26, 1987.

Executive Order No. 12778

This rule has been reviewed in

accordance with Executive Order No.

12778, Civil Justice Reform, and the

required certification has been made to

OMB. All State and local laws and

regulations that are in conflict with this

rule are preempted. No retroactive effect

is to be given to this rule. This rule does

not require administrative proceedings

before parties may file suit in court.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

This program is listed in the Catalog

of Federal Domestic Assistance under

No. 10.217, Higher Education Challenge

Grants Program. For the reasons set

forth in the Final Rule related Notice to

7 CFR part 3015, subpart V, 57 FR

15278, April 27, 1992, this program is

excluded from the scope of Executive

Order 12372 which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials.

Background and Purpose

This document proposes to add a new

part 3405 to title 7, subtitle B, chapter

XXXIV of the Code of Federal

Regulations, for the purpose of

administering the Higher Education

Challenge Grants Program. Under the

authority of section 1417(b)(1) of the

National Agricultural Research,

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of

1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(1)),

the Secretary of Agriculture is

authorized to conduct competitive grant

programs to strengthen institutional

capacities, including curriculum,

faculty, scientific instrumentation,

instruction delivery systems, and

student recruitment and retention, to

respond to identified State, regional,

national, or international educational

needs in the food and agricultural

sciences. The issuance of this rule will

establish and codify the administrative

procedures to be followed annually in

the solicitation of competitive grant

proposals, the evaluation of such

proposals, and the award of grants

under this program.

The Challenge Grants Program is

intended to assist colleges and

universities in the United States, having

a demonstrable capacity to carry out the

teaching of the food and agricultural

sciences, in providing high quality

educational programs in the food and

agricultural sciences. These programs

will, in turn, attract outstanding

students and produce graduates capable

of strengthening the Nation’s food and

agricultural scientific and professional

work force.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 3405

Grant programs—agriculture,

Agriculture higher education.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, it is proposed to amend title

7, subtitle B, chapter XXXIV, of the

Code of Federal Regulations by adding

part 3405 to read as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65445

PART 3405—HIGHER EDUCATION

CHALLENGE GRANTS PROGRAM

Subpart A—General Information

Sec.

3405.1 Applicability of regulations.

3405.2 Definitions.

3405.3 Institutional eligibility.

Subpart B—Program Description

3405.4 Purpose of the program.

3405.5 Matching funds.

3405.6 Scope of program.

3405.7 Joint project proposals.

3405.8 Complementary project proposals.

3405.9 Use of funds for facilities.

Subpart C—Preparation of a Proposal

3405.10 Program application materials.

3405.11 Content of a proposal.

Subpart D—Submission of a Proposal

3405.12 Intent to submit a proposal.

3405.13 When and where to submit a

proposal.

Subpart E—Proposal Review and

Evaluation

3405.14 Proposal review.

3405.15 Evaluation criteria.

Subpart F—Supplementary Information

3405.16 Access to peer review information.

3405.17 Grant awards.

3405.18 Use of funds; changes.

3405.19 Monitoring progress of funded

projects.

3405.20 Other Federal statutes and

regulations that apply.

3405.21 Confidential aspects of proposals

and awards.

3405.22 Evaluation of program.

Authority: Sec. 1470, National Agricultural

Research, Extension and Teaching Policy Act

of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3316).

Subpart A—General Information

§ 3405.1 Applicability of regulations.

(a) The regulations of this part only

apply to competitive Higher Education

Challenge Grants awarded under the

provisions of section 1417(b)(1) of the

National Agricultural Research,

Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of

1977, as amended (NARETPA) (7 U.S.C.

3152(b)(1)), to strengthen institutional

capacities, including curriculum,

faculty, scientific instrumentation,

instruction delivery systems, and

student recruitment and retention.

Section 1405 of NARETPA (7 U.S.C.

3121) designates the U.S. Department of

Agriculture (USDA) as the lead Federal

agency for agricultural research,

extension, and teaching in the food and

agricultural sciences. It authorizes the

Secretary of Agriculture, who has

delegated the authority to the

Administrator of the Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension

Service (CSREES), to make competitive

grants to land-grant colleges and

universities, to colleges and universities

having significant minority enrollments

and a demonstrable capacity to carry out

the teaching of food and agricultural

sciences, and to other U.S. colleges and

universities having a demonstrable

capacity to carry out the teaching of

food and agricultural sciences, for a

period not to exceed 5 years, to

administer and conduct programs to

respond to identified State, regional,

national, or international educational

needs in the food and agricultural

sciences.

(b) To the extent that funds are

available, each year CSREES will

publish a Federal Register notice

announcing the program and soliciting

grant applications.

(c)(1) Based on the amount of funds

appropriated in any fiscal year, CSREES

will determine and cite in the program

announcement:

(i) The targeted need area(s) to be

supported or, if the entire scope of a

particular targeted need area is not to be

supported, the specific special

interest(s) within that targeted need area

to be supported;

(ii) The degree level(s) to be

supported;

(iii) The maximum project period a

proposal may request;

(iv) The maximum amount of funds

that may be requested by an institution

under a regular, complementary, or joint

project proposal; and

(v) The maximum total funds that

may be awarded to an institution under

the program in a given fiscal year,

including how funds awarded for

complementary and for joint project

proposals will be counted toward the

institutional maximum.

(2) The program announcement will

also specify the deadline date for

proposal submission, the number of

copies of each proposal that must be

submitted, the address to which a

proposal must be submitted, and

whether or not Form CSRS–711, ‘‘Intent

to Submit a Proposal,’’ is requested.

(d)(1) If it is deemed by CSREES that,

for a given fiscal year, additional

determinations are necessary, each, as

relevant, will be stated in the program

announcement. Such determinations

may include:

(i) Limits on the subject matter/

emphasis areas to be supported;

(ii) The maximum number of

proposals that may be submitted on

behalf of the same school, college, or

equivalent administrative unit within an

institution;

(iii) The maximum total number of

proposals that may be submitted by an

institution;

(iv) The minimum project period a

proposal may request;

(v) The minimum amount of funds

that may be requested by an institution

under a regular, complementary, or joint

project proposal;

(vi) The proportion of the

appropriation reserved for, or available

to, regular, complementary, and joint

project proposals;

(vii) The proportion of the

appropriation reserved for, or available

to, projects in each announced targeted

need area;

(viii) The proportion of the

appropriation reserved for, or available

to, each subject matter/emphasis area;

(ix) The maximum number of grants

that may be awarded to an institution

under the program in a given fiscal year;

and

(x) Limits on the use of grant funds for

travel or to purchase equipment, if any.

(2) The program announcement also

will contain any other limitations

deemed necessary by CSREES for proper

conduct of the program in the

applicable year.

(e) The regulations of this part do not

apply to grants awarded by the

Department of Agriculture under any

other authority.

§ 3405.2 Definitions.

As used in this part:

(a) Authorized departmental officer

means the Secretary or any employee of

the Department who has the authority to

issue or modify grant instruments on

behalf of the Secretary.

(b) Authorized organizational

representative means the president of

the institution or the official, designated

by the president of the institution, who

has the authority to commit the

resources of the institution.

(c) Budget period means the interval

of time (usually 12 months) into which

the project period is divided for

budgetary and reporting purposes.

(d) Cash contributions means the

applicant’s cash outlay, including the

outlay of money contributed to the

applicant by non-Federal third parties.

(e) Citizen or national of the United

States means:

(1) A citizen or native resident of a

State; or,

(2) A person defined in the

Immigration and Nationality Act, 8

U.S.C. 1101(a)(22), who, though not a

citizen of the United States, owes

permanent allegiance to the United

States.

(f) College or University means an

educational institution in any State

which:

(1) Admits as regular students only

persons having a certificate of
65446 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

graduation from a school providing

secondary education, or the recognized

equivalent of such a certificate;

(2) Is legally authorized within such

States to provide a program of education

beyond secondary education;

(3) Provides an educational program

for which a baccalaureate degree or any

other higher degree is awarded;

(4) Is a public or other nonprofit

institution; and

(5) Is accredited by a nationally

recognized accrediting agency or

association.

(g) Complementary project proposal

means a proposal for a project which

involves coordination with one or more

other projects for which funding was

awarded under this program in a

previous fiscal year, or for which

funding is requested under this program

in the current fiscal year.

(h) Department or USDA means the

United States Department of

Agriculture.

(i) Eligible institution means landgrant and other U.S. colleges and

universities offering a baccalaureate or

first professional degree in at least one

discipline or area of the food and

agricultural sciences.

(j) Eligible participant means, for

purposes of § 3405.6(b), Faculty

Preparation and Enhancement for

Teaching, and § 3405.6(f), Student

Recruitment and Retention, an

individual who: Is a citizen or national

of the United States, as defined in

§ 3405.2(e); or Is a citizen of the

Federated States of Micronesia, the

Republic of the Marshall Islands, or the

Republic of Palau. Where eligibility is

claimed under § 3405.2(e)(2),

documentary evidence from the

Immigration and Naturalization Service

as to such eligibility must be made

available to CSREES upon request.

(k) Food and agricultural sciences

means basic, applied, and

developmental research, extension, and

teaching activities in the food,

agricultural, renewable natural

resources, forestry, and physical and

social sciences, in the broadest sense of

these terms, including but not limited

to, activities concerned with the

production, processing, marketing,

distribution, conservation,

consumption, research, and

development of food and agriculturally

related products and services, and

inclusive of programs in agriculture,

natural resources, aquaculture, forestry,

veterinary medicine, home economics,

rural development, and closely allied

disciplines.

(l) Grantee means the institution

designated in the grant award document

as the responsible legal entity to which

a grant is awarded.

(m) Joint project proposal means a

proposal for a project, which will

involve the applicant institution and

two or more other colleges, universities,

community colleges, junior colleges, or

other institutions, each of which will

assume a major role in the conduct of

the proposed project, and for which the

applicant institution will transfer at

least one-half of the awarded funds to

the other institutions participating in

the project. Only the applicant must

meet the definition of ‘‘eligible

institution’’ as specified in § 3405.2(i);

the other institutions participating in a

joint project proposal are not required to

meet the definition of ‘‘eligible

institution’’ as specified in § 3405.2(i),

nor required to meet the definition of

‘‘college’’ or ‘‘university’’ as specified in

§ 3405.2(f).

(n) Land-grant colleges and

universities means those institutions

eligible to receive funds under the Act

of July 2, 1862 (12 Stat. 503–505, as

amended; 7 U.S.C. 301–305, 307 and

308), or the Act of August 30, 1890 (26

Stat. 417–419, as amended; 7 U.S.C.

321–326 and 328), including Tuskegee

University.

(o) Matching or Cost-sharing means

that portion of project costs not borne by

the Federal Government, including the

value of in-kind contributions.

(p) Peer review panel means a group

of experts or consultants, qualified by

training and experience in particular

fields of science, education, or

technology to give expert advice on the

merit of grant applications in such

fields, who evaluate eligible proposals

submitted to this program in their

personal area(s) of expertise.

(q) Project director means the single

individual designated by the grantee in

the grant application and approved by

the Secretary who is responsible for the

direction and management of the

project.

(r) Prior approval means written

approval evidencing prior consent by an

authorized departmental officer as

defined in § 3405.2(a) of this part.

(s) Project means the particular

activity within the scope of one or more

of the targeted areas supported by a

grant awarded under this program.

(t) Project period means the period, as

stated in the award document and

modifications thereto, if any, during

which Federal sponsorship begins and

ends.

(u) Secretary means the Secretary of

Agriculture and any other officer or

employee of the Department of

Agriculture to whom the authority

involved may be delegated.

(v) State means any one of the fifty

States, the Commonwealth of Puerto

Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the

Commonwealth of the Northern

Marianas, the Virgin Islands of the

United States, and the District of

Columbia.

(w) Teaching means formal classroom

instruction, laboratory instruction, and

practicum experience in the food and

agricultural sciences and matters related

thereto (such as faculty development,

student recruitment and services,

curriculum development, instructional

materials and equipment, and

innovative teaching methodologies)

conducted by colleges and universities

offering baccalaureate or higher degrees.

(x) Third party in-kind contributions

means non-cash contributions of

property or services provided by nonFederal third parties, including real

property, equipment, supplies and other

expendable property, directly benefiting

and specifically identifiable to a funded

project or program.

(y) United States means the several

States, the territories and possessions of

the United States, the Commonwealth of

Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa,

the Commonwealth of the Northern

Marianas, the Virgin Islands of the

United States, and the District of

Columbia.

§ 3405.3 Institutional eligibility.

Proposals may be submitted by landgrant and other U.S. colleges and

universities offering a baccalaureate or

first professional degree in at least one

discipline or area of the food and

agricultural sciences. Each applicant

must have a demonstrable capacity for,

and a significant ongoing commitment

to, the teaching of food and agricultural

sciences generally and to the specific

need and/or subject area(s) for which a

grant is requested. Awards may be made

only to eligible institutions as defined in

§ 3405.2(i).

Subpart B—Program Description

§ 3405.4 Purpose of the program.

The Department of Agriculture is

designated as the lead Federal agency

for higher education in the food and

agricultural sciences. In this context,

CSREES has specific responsibility to

initiate and support projects to

strengthen college and university

teaching programs in the food and

agricultural sciences. One national

initiative for carrying out this

responsibility is the competitive Higher

Education Challenge Grants Program. A

primary goal of the program is to attract

and ensure a continual flow of

outstanding programs and to provide
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65447

them with an education of the highest

quality available anywhere in the world

and which reflects the unique needs of

the Nation. It is designed to stimulate

and enable colleges and universities to

provide the quality of education

necessary to produce baccalaureate or

higher degree level graduates capable of

strengthening the Nation’s food and

agricultural scientific and professional

work force. It is intended that projects

supported by the program will:

(a) Address a State, regional, national,

or international educational need;

(b) Involve a creative or

nontraditional approach toward

addressing that need which can serve as

a model to others;

(c) Encourage and facilitate better

working relationships in the universities

and the private sector, to enhance

program quality and supplement

available resources; and

(d) Result in benefits which will

likely transcend the project duration

and USDA support.

§ 3405.5 Matching funds.

Each application must provide for

matching support from a non-Federal

source. CSREES will cite in the program

announcement the required percentage

of institutional cost sharing.

§ 3405.6 Scope of program.

This program supports projects

related to strengthening undergraduate

or graduate teaching programs as

specified in the annual program

announcement. Only proposals

addressing one or more of the specific

targeted need areas(s) identified in the

program announcement will be funded.

Proposals may focus on any subject

matter area(s) in the food and

agricultural sciences unless limited by

determinations as specified in the

annual program announcement. A

proposal may address a single targeted

need area or multiple targeted need

areas, and may be focused on a single

subject matter area or multiple subject

matter areas, in any combination (e.g.,

curiculum development in horticulture;

curriculum development, faculty

enhancement, and student experiential

learning in animal science; faculty

enhancement in food science and

agribusiness management; or instruction

delivery systems and student

experiential learning in plant science,

horticulture, and entomology). Targeted

need areas will consist of one or more

of the following:

(a) Curricula design and materials

development. (1) The purpose of this

initiative is to promote new and

improved curricula and materials to

increase the quality of, and

continuously renew, the Nation’s

academic programs in the food and

agricultural sciences. The overall

objective is to stimulate the

development and facilitate the use of

exemplary education models and

materials that incorporate the most

recent advances in subject matter,

research on teaching and learning

theory, and instructional technology.

Proposals may emphasize: the

development of courses of study, degree

programs, and instructional materials;

the use of new approaches to the study

of traditional subjects; or the

introduction of new subjects, or new

applications of knowledge, pertaining to

the food and agricultural sciences.

(2) Examples include, but are not

limited to, curricula and materials that

promote:

(i) Raising the level of scholastic

achievement of the Nation’s graduates

in the food and agricultural sciences.

(ii) Addressing the special needs of

particular groups of students, such as

minorities, gifted and talented, or those

with educational backgrounds that

warrant enrichment.

(iii) Using alternative instructional

strategies or methodologies, including

computer-assisted instruction or

simulation modeling, media programs

that reach large audiences efficiently

and effectively, activities that provide

hands-on learning experiences, and

educational programs that extend

learning beyond the classroom.

(iv) Using sound pedagogy,

particularly with regard to recent

research on how to motivate students to

learn, retain, apply, and transfer

knowledge, skills, and competencies.

(v) Building student competencies to

integrate and synthesize knowledge

from several disciplines.

(b) Faculty preparation and

enhancement for teaching. (1) The

purpose of this initiative is to advance

faculty development in the areas of

teaching competency, subject matter

expertise, or student recruitment and

advising skills. Teachers are central to

education. They serve as models,

motivators, and mentors—the catalysts

of the learning process. Moreover,

teachers are agents for developing,

replicating, and exchanging effective

teaching materials and methods. For

these reasons, education can be

strengthened only when teachers are

adequately prepared, highly motivated,

and appropriately recognized and

rewarded.

(2) Each faculty recipient of support

for developmental activities under

§ 3405.6(b) must be an ‘‘eligible

participant’’ as defined in § 3405.2(j) of

this part.

(3) Examples of developmental

activities include, but are not limited to,

those which enable teaching faculty to:

(i) Gain experience with recent

developments or innovative technology

relevant to their teaching

responsibilities.

(ii) Work under the guidance and

direction of experts who have

substantial expertise in an area related

to the developmental goals of the

project.

(iii) Work with scientists or

professionals in government, industry,

or other colleges or universities to learn

new applications in a field.

(iv) Obtain personal experience

working with new ideas and techniques.

(v) Expand competence with new

methods of information delivery, such

as computer-assisted or televised

instruction.

(vi) Increase understanding of the

special needs of non-traditional

students or students from groups that

are underrepresented in the food and

agricultural sciences workforce.

(c) Instruction delivery systems. (1)

The purpose of this initiative is to

encourage the use of alternative

methods of delivering instruction to

enhance the quality, effectiveness, and

cost efficiency of teaching programs.

The importance of this initiative is

evidenced by advances in educational

research which have substantiated the

theory that differences in the learning

styles of students often require

alternative instructional methodologies.

Also, the rising costs of higher

education strongly suggest that colleges

and universities undertake more efforts

of a collaborative nature in order to

deliver instruction which maximizes

program quality and reduces

unnecessary duplication. At the same

time, advancements in knowledge and

technology continue to introduce new

subject matter areas which warrant

consideration and implementation of

innovative instruction techniques,

methodologies, and delivery systems.

(2) Examples include, but are not

limited to:

(i) Use of computers.

(ii) Teleconferencing.

(iii) Networking via satellite

communications.

(iv) Regionalization of academic

programs.

(v) Mobile classrooms and

laboratories.

(vi) Individualized learning centers.

(vii) Symposia, forums, regional or

national workshops, etc.

(d) Scientific instrumentation for

teaching. (1) The purpose of this

initiative is to provide students in

science-oriented courses the necessary
65448 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

experience with suitable, up-to-date

equipment in order to involve them in

work central to scientific understanding

and progress. This program initiative

will support the acquisition of

instructional laboratory and classroom

equipment to assure the achievement

and maintenance of outstanding food

and agricultural sciences higher

education programs. A proposal may

request support for acquiring new, stateof-the-art instructional scientific

equipment, upgrading existing

equipment, or replacing non-functional

or clearly obsolete equipment.

(2) Examples include, but are not

limited to:

(i) Rental or purchase of modern

instruments to improve student learning

experiences in courses, laboratories, and

field work.

(ii) Development of new ways of using

instrumentation to extend instructional

capabilities.

(iii) Establishment of equipmentsharing capability via consortia or

centers that develop innovative

opportunities, such as mobile

laboratories or satellite access to

industry or government laboratories.

(e) Student experimental learning. (1)

The purpose of this initiative is to

further the development of student

scientific and professional competencies

through experiential learning programs

which provide students with

opportunities to solve complex

problems in the context of real-world

situations. Effective experiential

learning is essential in preparing future

graduates to advance knowledge and

technology, enhance quality of life,

conserve resources, and revitalize the

Nation’s economic competitiveness.

Such experiential learning opportunities

are most effective when they serve to

advance decision-making and

communication skills as well as

technological expertise.

(2) Examples, include, but are not

limited to, projects which:

(i) Provide opportunities for students

to participate in research projects, either

as a part of an ongoing research project

or in a project designed especially for

this program.

(ii) Provide opportunities for students

to complete apprenticeships,

internships, or similar participatory

learning experiences.

(iii) Expand and enrich courses which

are of a practicum nature.

(iv) Provide career mentoring

experiences that link students with

outstanding professionals.

(f) Student recruitment and retention.

(1) The purpose of this initiative is to

strengthen student recruitment and

retention programs in order to promote

the future strength of the Nation’s

scientific and professional work force.

The Nation’s economic competitiveness

and quality of life rest upon the

availability of a cadre of outstanding

research scientists, university faculty,

and other professionals in the food and

agricultural sciences. A substantial need

exists to supplement efforts to attract

increased numbers of academically

outstanding students to prepare for

careers as food and agricultural

scientists and professionals. It is

particularly important to augment the

racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of

the student body in order to promote a

robust exchange of ideas and a more

effective use of the full breadth of the

Nation’s intellectual resources.

(2) Each student recipient of monetary

support for education costs or

developmental purposes under

§ 3405.6(f) must be enrolled at an

eligible institution and meet the

requirement of an ‘‘eligible participant’’

as defined in § 3405.2(j) of this part.

(3) Examples include, but are not

limited to:

(i) Special outreach programs for

elementary and secondary students as

well as parents, counselors, and the

general public to broaden awareness of

the extensive nature and diversity of

career opportunities for graduates in the

food and agricultural sciences.

(ii) Special activities and materials to

establish more effective linkages with

high school science classes.

(iii) Unique or innovative student

recruitment activities, materials, and

personnel.

(iv) Special retention programs to

assure student progression through and

completion of an educational program.

(v) Development and dissemination of

stimulating career information

materials.

(vi) Use of regional or national media

to promote food and agricultural

sciences higher education.

(vii) Providing financial incentives to

enable and encourage students to

pursue and complete an undergraduate

or graduate degree in an area of the food

and agricultural sciences.

(viii) Special recruitment programs to

increase the participation of students

from non-traditional or

underrepresented groups in courses of

study in the food and agricultural

sciences.

§ 3405.7 Joint project proposals.

Applicants are encouraged to submit

joint project proposals as defined in

§ 3405.2(m), which address regional or

national problems and which will result

overall in strengthening higher

education in the food and agricultural

sciences. The goals of such joint

initiatives should include maximizing

the use of limited resources by

generating a critical mass of expertise

and activity focused on a targeted need

area(s), increasing cost-effectiveness

through achieving economies of scale,

strengthening the scope and quality of a

project’s impact, and promoting

coalition building likely to transcend

the project’s lifetime and lead to future

ventures.

§ 3405.8 Complementary project

proposals.

Institutions may submit proposals

that are complementary in nature as

defined in § 3405.2(g). Such

complementary project proposals may

be submitted by the same or by different

eligible institutions.

§ 3405.9 Use of funds for facilities.

Under the Higher Education

Challenge Grants Program, the use of

grant funds to plan, acquire, or

construct a building or facility is not

allowed. With prior approval, in

accordance with the cost principles set

forth in OMB Circular No. A–21, some

grant funds may be used for minor

alterations, renovations, or repairs

deemed necessary to retrofit existing

teaching spaces in order to carry out a

funded project. However, requests to

use grant funds for such purposes must

demonstrate that the alterations,

renovations, or repairs are incidental to

the major purpose for which a grant is

made.

Subpart C—Preparation of a Proposal

§ 3405.10 Program application materials.

Program application materials in an

application package will be made

available to eligible institutions upon

request. These materials include the

program announcement, the

administrative provisions for the

program, and the forms needed to

prepare and submit grant applications

under the program.

§ 3405.11 Content of a proposal.

(a) Proposal cover page. (1) Form

CSRS–712, ‘‘Higher Education Proposal

Cover Page,’’ must be completed in its

entirety. Note that providing a Social

Security Number is voluntary, but is an

integral part of the CSREES information

system and will assist in the processing

of the proposal.

(2) One copy of the Form CSRS–712

must contain the pen-and-ink signatures

of the Project Director(s) and authorized

organizational representative for the

applicant institution.

(3) The title of the project shown on

the ‘‘Higher Education Proposal Cover
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65449

Page’’ must be brief (80-character

maximum) yet represent the major

thrust of the project. This information

will be used by the Department to

provide information to the Congress and

other interested parties.

(4) In block 7. of Form CSRS–712,

enter ‘‘Higher Education Challenge

Grants Program.’’

(5) In block 8.a. of Form CSRS–712,

enter ‘‘Teaching.’’ In block 8.b. identify

the code for the targeted need area(s) as

found on the reverse of the form. If a

proposal focuses on multiple targeted

need areas, enter each code associated

with the project and place an asterisk (*)

immediately following the code for the

primary targeted need area. In block 8.c.

identify the major area(s) of emphasis as

found on the reverse of the form. If a

proposal focuses on multiple areas of

emphasis, enter each code associated

with the project. This information will

be used by program staff for the proper

assignment of proposals to reviewers.

(6) In block 9. of Form CSRS–712,

indicate if the proposal is a

complementary project proposal or a

joint project proposal as defined in

§ 3405.2(g) and § 3405.2(m) of this part.

If it is not a complementary project

proposal or a joint project proposal,

identify it as a regular project proposal.

(7) In block 13. of Form CSRS–712,

indicate if the proposal is a new, firsttime submission or if the proposal is a

resubmission of a proposal that has been

submitted to, but not funded under, the

Higher Education Challenge Grants

Program in a previous competition.

(b) Table of contents. For ease in

locating information, each proposal

must contain a detailed table of contents

just after the Proposal Cover Page. The

Table of Contents should include page

numbers for each component of the

proposal. Pagination should begin

immediately following the Table of

Contents.

(c) Project summary. (1) A Project

Summary should immediately follow

the Table of Contents. The information

provided in the Project Summary may

be used by the program staff for a

variety of purposes, including the

proper assignment of proposals to

reviewers and providing information to

reviewers prior to the peer panels

meeting. The name of the institution,

the targeted need area(s), and the title of

the proposal must be identified exactly

as shown on the ‘‘Higher Education

Proposal Cover Page.’’

(2) If the proposal is a complementary

project proposal, as defined in

§ 3405.2(g) of this part, indicate such

and identify the other complementary

project(s) by citing the name of the

submitting institution, the title of the

project, the project director, and the

grant number (if funded in a previous

year) exactly as shown on the cover

page of the complementary project so

that appropriate consideration can be

given to the interrelatedness of the

proposals in the evaluation process.

(3) If the proposal is a joint project

proposal, as defined in § 3405.2(m) of

this part, indicate such and identify the

other participating institutions and the

key faculty member or other individual

responsible for coordinating the project

at each institution.

(4) The Project Summary should be a

concise description of the proposed

activity suitable for publication by the

Department to inform the general public

about awards under the program. The

text must not exceed one page, singlespaced. The Project Summary should be

a self-contained description of the

activity which would result if the

proposal is funded by USDA. It should

include: The objectives of the project; a

synopsis of the plan of operation; a

description of how the project will

strengthen higher education in the food

and agricultural sciences in the United

States; and the plans for disseminating

project results. The Project Summary

should be written so that a technically

literate reader can evaluate the use of

Federal funds in support of the project.

(d) Resubmission of a proposal.—(1)

Resubmission of previously unfunded

proposals. If a proposal has been

submitted previously, but was not

funded, such should be indicated in

block 13. on Form CSRS–712, ‘‘Higher

Education Proposal Cover Page,’’ and

the following information should be

included in the proposal: The fiscal

year(s) in which the proposal was

submitted previously; a summary of the

peer reviewers’ comments; and how

these comments have been addressed in

the current proposal, including the page

numbers in the current proposal where

the reviewers’ comments have been

addressed. This information may be

provided as a section of the proposal

following the Project Summary and

preceding the proposal narrative or it

may be placed in the Appendix (see

§ 3405.11(i)). In either case, the location

of this information should be indicated

in the Table of Contents. Further, when

possible, the information should be

presented in tabular format. Applicants

who choose to resubmit proposals that

were previously submitted, but not

funded, should note that resubmitted

proposals must compete equally with

newly submitted proposals. Submitting

a proposal that has been revised based

on a previous peer review panel’s

critique of the proposal does not

guarantee the success of the resubmitted

proposal.

(2) Resubmission of previously funded

proposals. The Higher Education

Challenge Grants Program is not

designed to support activities that

essentially are repetitive in nature over

multiple grant awards. Project directors

who have had their projects funded

previously are discouraged from

resubmitting relatively identical

proposals for further funding. Proposals

that are sequential continuations or new

stages of previously funded Challenge

Grants Program projects must compete

with first-time proposals. Therefore,

project directors should thoroughly

demonstrate how the project proposed

in the current application expands

substantially upon a previously funded

project (i.e., demonstrate how the new

project will advance the former project

to the next level of attainment or will

achieve expanded goals). The proposal

must also show the degree to which the

new phase promotes innovativeness and

creativity beyond the scope of the

previously funded project.

(e) Narrative of a proposal. The

narrative portion of the proposal is

limited to 20 pages in length. The onepage Project Summary is not included

in the 20-page limitation. The narrative

must be typed on one side of the page

only, using a font no smaller than 12

point, and double-spaced. All margins

must be at least one inch. All pages

following the Table of Contents must be

paginated. It should be noted that

reviewers will not be required to read

beyond 20 pages of the narrative to

evaluate the proposal. The narrative

should contain the following sections:

(1) Potential for advancing the quality

of education.—(i) Impact. (A) Identify

the targeted need area(s).

(B) Clearly state the specific

instructional problem or opportunity to

be addressed.

(C) Describe how and by whom the

focus and scope of the project were

determined. Summarize the body of

knowledge which substantiates the need

for the proposed project.

(D) Describe ongoing or recently

completed significant activities related

to the proposed project for which

previous funding was received under

this program.

(E) Discuss how the project will be of

value at the State, regional, national, or

international level(s).

(F) Discuss how the benefits to be

derived from the project will transcend

the applicant institution or the grant

period. Also discuss the probabilities of

the project being adapted by other

institutions. For example, can the

project serve as a model for others?
65450 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Continuation plans. Discuss the

likelihood of, or plans for, continuation

or expansion of the project beyond

USDA support. For example, does the

institution’s long-range budget or

academic plan provide for the realistic

continuation or expansion of the

initiative undertaken by this project

after the end of the grant period, are

plans for eventual self-support built into

the project, are plans being made to

institutionalize the project, are plans

being made to institutionalize the

program if it meets with success, and

are there indications of other continuing

non-Federal support?

(iii) Innovation. Describe the degree to

which the proposal reflects an

innovative or non-traditional approach

to solving a higher education problem or

strengthening the quality of higher

education in the food and agricultural

sciences.

(iv) Products and results. Explain the

expected products and results and their

potential impact on strengthening food

and agricultural sciences higher

education in the United States.

(2) Overall approach and cooperative

linkages.—(i) Proposed approach.—(A)

Objectives. Cite and discuss the specific

objectives to be accomplished under the

project.

(B) Plan of operation. (1) Describe

procedures for accomplishing the

objectives of the project.

(2) Describe plans for management of

the project to ensure its proper and

efficient administration.

(3) Describe the way in which

resources and personnel will be used to

conduct the project.

(C) Timetable. Provide a timetable for

conducting the project. Identify all

important project milestones and dates

as they relate to project start-up,

execution, evaluation, dissemination,

and close-out.

(ii) Evaluation plans. (A) Provide a

plan for evaluating the accomplishment

of stated objectives during the conduct

of the project. Indicate the criteria, and

corresponding weight of each, to be

used in the evaluation process, describe

any data to be collected and analyzed,

and explain the methodology that will

be used to determine the extent to

which the needs underlying the project

are met.

(B) Provide a plan for evaluating the

effectiveness of the end results upon

conclusion of the project. Include the

same kinds of information requested in

§ 3405.11(e)(2)(ii)(A).

(iii) Dissemination plans. Discuss

plans to disseminate project results and

products. Identify target audiences and

explain methods of communication.

(iv) Partnerships and collaborative

efforts. (A) Explain how the project will

maximize partnership ventures and

collaborative efforts to strengthen food

and agricultural sciences higher

education (e.g., involvement of faculty

in related disciplines at the same

institution, joint projects with other

colleges or universities, or cooperative

activities with business or industry).

Also explain how it will stimulate

academia, the States, or the private

sector to join with the Federal partner

in enhancing food and agricultural

sciences higher education.

(B) Provide evidence, via letters from

the parties involved, that arrangements

necessary for collaborative partnerships

or joint initiatives have been discussed

and realistically can be expected to

come to fruition, or actually have been

finalized contingent on an award under

this program. Letters must be signed by

an official who has the authority to

commit the resources of the

organization. Such letters should be

referenced in the plan of operation, but

the actual letters should be included in

the Appendix section of the proposal.

Any potential conflict(s) of interest that

might result from the proposed

collaborative arrangements must be

discussed in detail.

(3) Institutional commitment and

resources.—(i) Institutional

commitment. Discuss the institution’s

commitment to the project. For

example, substantiate that the

institution attributes a high priority to

the project, discuss how the project will

contribute to the achievement of the

institution’s long-term (five- to ten-year)

goals, explain how the project will help

satisfy the institution’s high-priority

objectives, or show how this project is

linked to and supported by the

institution’s strategic plan.

(ii) Institutional resources. Document

the commitment of institutional

resources to the project, and show that

the institutional resources to be made

available to the project, when combined

with the support requested from USDA,

will be adequate to carry out the

activities of the project. Discuss

institutional facilities, equipment,

computer services, and other

appropriate resources available to the

project.

(f) Key personnel. A Form CSRS–708,

‘‘Summary Vita—Teaching Proposal,’’

should be included for each key person

associated with the project.

(g) Budget and cost-effectiveness.—(1)

Budget form. (i) Prepare Form CSRS–

713, ‘‘Higher Education Budget,’’ in

accordance with instructions provided

with the form. Proposals may request

support for a period to be identified in

each year’s program announcement. A

budget form is required for each year of

requested support. In addition, a

summary budget is required detailing

the requested total support for the

overall project period. Form CSRS–713

may be reproduced as needed by

proposers. Funds may be requested

under any of the categories listed on the

form, provided that the item or service

for which support is requested is

allowable under the authorizing

legislation, the applicable Federal cost

principles, and these administrative

provisions, and can be justified as

necessary for the successful conduct of

the proposed project.

(ii) The approved negotiated

instruction rate or the rate allowed by

law should be used when computing

indirect costs. If a reduced rate of

indirect costs is voluntarily requested

from USDA, the remaining allowable

indirect costs may be used as matching

funds.

(2) Matching funds. When

documenting matching contributions,

use the following guidelines:

(i) When preparing the column of

Form CSRS–713 entitled ‘‘Applicant

Contributions To Matching Funds,’’

only those costs to be contributed by the

applicant for the purposes of matching

should be shown. The total amount of

this column should be indicated in item

M.

(ii) In item N of Form CSRS–713,

show a total dollar amount for Cash

Contributions from both the applicant

and any third parties; also show a total

dollar amount (based on current fair

market value) for Non-cash

Contributions from both the applicant

and any third parties.

(iii) To be counted toward the

matching requirements stated in

§ 3405.5 of this part, proposals must

include written verification of any

actual commitments of matching

support (including both cash and noncash contributions) from third parties.

Written verification means—

(A) For any third party cash

contributions, a separate pledge

agreement for each donation, signed by

the authorized organizational

representatives of the donor

organization and the applicant

institution, which must include:

(1) The name, address, and telephone

number of the donor;

(2) The name of the applicant

institution;

(3) The title of the project for which

the donation is made;

(4) The dollar amount of the cash

donation; and
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65451

(5) A statement that the donor will

pay the cash contribution during the

grant period; and

(B) For any third party non-cash

contributions, a separate pledge

agreement for each contribution, signed

by the authorized organizational

representatives of the donor

organization and the applicant

institution, which must include:

(1) The name, address, and telephone

number of the donor;

(2) The name of the applicant

institution;

(3) The title of the project for which

the donation is made;

(4) A good faith estimate of the

current fair market value of the noncash contribution; and

(5) A statement that the donor will

make the contribution during the grant

period.

(iv) All pledge agreements referenced

in § 3405.11(g)(2)(iii) (A) and (B) must

be placed in the proposal immediately

following Form CSRS–713. The sources

and amounts of all matching support

from outside the applicant institution

should be summarized in the Budget

Narrative section of the proposal.

(v) Applicants should refer to OMB

Circulars A–110, ‘‘Uniform

Administrative Requirements for Grants

and Agreements With Institutions of

Higher Education, Hospitals and Other

Non-profit Organizations,’’ and A–21,

‘‘Cost Principles for Educational

Institutions,’’ for further guidance and

other requirements relating to matching

and allowable costs.

(3) Chart on shared budget for joint

project proposal. For a joint project

proposal, a plan must be provided

indicating how funds will be distributed

to the participating institutions. The

budget section of a joint project

proposal should include a chart

indicating: the names of the

participating institutions; the amount of

funds to be disbursed to those

institutions; and the way in which such

funds will be used in accordance with

items A through L of Form CSRS–713,

‘‘Higher Education Budget.’’ If a

proposal is not for a joint project, such

a chart is not required.

(4) Budget narrative. (i) Discuss how

the budget specifically supports the

proposed project activities. Explain how

such budget items as professional or

technical staff, travel, equipment, etc.,

are essential to achieving project

objectives.

(ii) Justify that the total budget,

including funds requested from USDA

and any matching support provided,

will be adequate to carry out the

activities of the project. Provide a

summary of sources and amounts of all

third party matching support.

(iii) Justify the project’s costeffectiveness. Show how the project

maximizes the use of limited resources,

optimizes educational value for the

dollar, achieves economies of scale, or

leverages additional funds. For example,

discuss how the project has the

potential to generate a critical mass of

expertise and activity focused on a

targeted need area, or to promote

coalition building that could lead to

future ventures.

(iv) Include the percentage of time key

personnel will work on the project, both

during the academic year and summer.

When salaries of university personnel

will be paid by a combination of USDA

and institutional funds, the total

compensation must not exceed the

faculty member’s regular annual

compensation. In addition, the total

commitment of time devoted to the

project, when combined with time for

teaching and research duties, other

sponsored agreements, and other

employment obligations to the

institution, must not exceed 100 percent

of the normal workload for which the

employee is compensated, in

accordance with established university

policies and applicable Federal cost

principles.

(v) If the proposal addresses more

than one targeted need area (e.g.,

student experiential learning and

instruction delivery systems), estimate

the proportion of the funds requested

from USDA that will support each

respective targeted need area.

(h) Current and pending support.

Each applicant must complete Form

CSRS–663, ‘‘Current and Pending

Support,’’ identifying any other current

public- or private-sponsored projects, in

addition to the proposed project, to

which key personnel listed in the

proposal under consideration have

committed portions of their time,

whether or not salary support for the

person(s) involved is included in the

budgets of the various projects. This

information should also be provided for

any pending proposals which are

currently being considered by, or which

will be submitted in the near future to,

other possible sponsors, including other

USDA programs or agencies. Concurrent

submission of identical or similar

projects to other possible sponsors will

not prejudice the review or evaluation

of a project under this program.

(i) Appendix. Each project narrative is

expected to be complete in itself and to

meet the 20-page limitation. Inclusion of

material in an Appendix should not be

used to circumvent the 20-page

limitation of the proposal narrative.

However, in those instances where

inclusion of supplemental information

is necessary to guarantee the peer

review panel’s complete understanding

of a proposal or to illustrate the integrity

of the design or a main thesis of the

proposal, such information may be

included in an Appendix. Examples of

supplemental material are photographs,

journal reprints, brochures and other

pertinent materials which are deemed to

be illustrative of major points in the

narrative but unsuitable for inclusion in

the proposal narrative itself. Information

on previously submitted proposals may

also be presented in the Appendix (refer

to § 3405.11(d)). When possible,

information in the Appendix should be

presented in tabular format. A complete

set for the Appendix material must be

attached to each copy of the grant

application submitted. The Appendix

must be identified with the title of the

project as it appears on Form CSRS–712

of the proposal and the name(s) of the

project director(s). The Appendix must

be referenced in the proposal narrative.

Subpart D—Submission of a Proposal

§ 3405.12 Intent to submit a proposal.

To assist CSREES in preparing for the

review of proposals, institutions

planning to submit proposals may be

requested to complete Form CSRS–711,

‘‘Intent to Submit a Proposal,’’ provided

in the application package. CSREES will

determine each year if Intent to Submit

a Proposal forms will be requested and

provide such information in the

program announcement. If Intent to

Submit a Proposal forms are required,

one form should be completed and

returned for each proposal an institution

anticipates submitting. Submitting this

form does failure to send this form

prohibit an institution from submitting

a proposal.

§ 3405.13 When and where to submit a

proposal.

The program announcement will

provide the deadline date for submitting

a proposal, the number of copies of each

proposal that must be submitted, and

the address to which proposals must be

submitted.

Subpart E—Proposal Review and

Evaluation

§ 3405.14 Proposal review.

The proposal evaluation process

includes both internal staff review and

merit evaluation by peer review panels

comprised of scientists, educators,

business representatives, and

Government officials. Peer review

panels will be selected and structured to

provide optimum expertise and
65452 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

objective judgment in the evaluation of

proposals.

§ 3405.15 Evaluation criteria.

The maximum score a proposal can

receive is 200 points. Unless otherwise

stated in the annual solicitation

published in the Federal Register, the

peer review panel will consider the

following criteria and weights to

evaluate proposals submitted:

Evaluation criterion Weight

(points)

(a) Potential for advancing the quality of education:

This criterion is used to assess the likelihood that the project will have a substantial impact upon and advance the quality of

food and agricultural sciences higher education by strengthening institutional capacities through promoting education reform

to meet clearly delineated needs

(1) Impact—Does the project address a targeted need area(s)? Is the problem or opportunity clearly documented? Does

the project address a State, regional, national, or international problem or opportunity? Will the benefits to be derived

from the project transcend the applicant institution and/or the grant period? is it probable that other institutions will

adapt this project for their own use? Can the project serve as a model for others? ........................................................... 20

(2) Continuation plans—Are there plans for continuation or expansion of the project beyond USDA support? Are there indications of external, non-Federal support? Are there realistic plans for making the project self-supporting? ................... 10

(3) Innovation—Are significant aspects of the project based on an innovation or a non-traditional approach toward solving

a higher education problem or strengthening the quality of higher education in the food and agricultural sciences? If

successful, is the project likely to lead to education reform? ............................................................................................... 20

(4) Products and results—Are the expected products and results of the project clearly explained? Do they have the potential to strengthen food and agricultural sciences higher education? Are the products likely to be of high quality? Will

the project contribute to a better understanding of or improvement in the quality, distribution, effectiveness, or racial,

ethnic, or gender diversity of the Nation’s food and agricultural scientific and professional expertise base? ..................... 20

(b) Overall approach and cooperative linkages:

This criterion relates to the soundness of the proposed approach and the quality of the partnerships likely to evolve as a result of the project

(1) Proposed approach—Do the objectives and plan of operation appear to be sound and appropriate relative to the targeted need area(s) and the impact anticipated? Are the procedures managerially, educationally, and/or scientifically

sound? Is the overall plan integrated with or does it expand upon other major efforts to improve the quality of food and

agricultural sciences higher education? Does the timetable appear to be readily achievable? ........................................... 20

(2) Evaluation—Are the evaluation plans adequate and reasonable? Do they allow for continuous and/or frequent feedback during the life of the project? Are the individuals involved in project evaluation skilled in evaluation strategies and

procedures? Can they provide an objective evaluation? Do evaluation plans facilitate the measurement of project

progress and outcomes? ....................................................................................................................................................... 10

(3) Dissemination—Does the proposed project include clearly outlined and realistic mechanisms that will lead to widespread dissemination of project results, including national electronic communication systems, publications, presentations at professional conferences, and/or use by faculty development or research/teaching skills workshops? ............. 10

(4) Partnerships and collaborative efforts—Will the project expand partnership ventures among disciplines at a university,

between colleges and universities, or with the private sector? Will the project lead to long-term relationships or cooperative partnerships that are likely to enhance program quality or supplement resources available to food and agricultural

sciences higher education? ................................................................................................................................................... 20

(c) Institutional commitment and resources:

This criterion relates to the institution’s commitment to the project and the adequacy of institutional resources available to

carry out the project

(1) Institutional commitment—Is there evidence to substantiate that the institution attributes a high-priority to the project,

that the project is linked to the achievement of the institution’s long-term goals, that it will help satisfy the institution’s

high-priority objectives, or that the project is supported by the institution’s strategic plans? .............................................. 10

(2) Institutional resources—Will the project have adequate support to carry out the proposed activities? Will the project

have reasonable access to needed resources such as instructional instrumentation, facilities, computer services, library

and other instruction support resources? .............................................................................................................................. 10

(d) Key personnel:

This criterion relates to the number and qualifications of the key persons who will carry out the project. Are designated project

personnel qualified to carry out a successful project? Are there sufficient numbers of personnel associated with the project

to achieve the stated objectives and the anticipated outcomes? ................................................................................................ 20

(e) Budget and cost-effectiveness:

This criterion relates to the extent to which the total budget adequately supports the project and is cost-effective

(1) Budget—Is the budget request justifiable? Are costs reasonable and necessary? Will the total budget be adequate to

carry out project activities? Are the source(s) and amount(s) of non-Federal matching support clearly identified and appropriately documented? For a joint project proposal, is the shared budget explained clearly and in sufficient detail? ..... 10

(2) Cost-effectiveness—Is the proposed project cost-effective? Does it demonstrate a creative use of limited resources,

maximize educational value per dollar of USDA support, achieve economies of scale, leverage additional funds or have

the potential to do so, focus expertise and activity on a targeted need area, or promote coalition building for current or

future ventures? ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10

(f) Overall quality of proposal:

This criterion relates to the degree to which the proposal complies with the application guidelines and is of high quality. Is the

proposal enhanced by its adherence to instructions (table of contents, organization, pagination, margin and font size, the

20-page limitation, appendices, etc.); accuracy of forms; clarity of budget narrative; well prepared vitae for all key personnel

associated with the project; and presentation (are ideas effectively presented, clearly articulated, and thoroughly explained,

etc.)? ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules 65453

Subpart F—Supplementary Information

§ 3405.16 Access to peer review

information.

After final decisions have been

announced, CSREES will, upon request,

inform the project director of the

reasons for its decision on a proposal.

Verbatim copies of summary reviews,

not including the identity of the

reviewers, will be made available to

respective project directors upon

specific request.

§ 3405.17 Grant awards.

(a) General. Within the limit of funds

available for such purpose, the

authorized departmental officer shall

make project grants to those responsible,

eligible applicants whose proposals are

judged most meritorious in the

announced targeted need areas under

the evaluation criteria and procedures

set forth in this part. The beginning of

the project period shall be no later than

September 30 of the Federal fiscal year

in which the project is approved for

support. All funds granted under this

part shall be expended solely for the

purpose for which the funds are granted

in accordance with the approved

application and budget, the regulations

of this part, the terms and conditions of

the award, the applicable Federal cost

principles, and the Department’s

Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations

(7 CFR part 3015).

(b) Organizational management

information. Specific management

information relating to a proposing

institution shall be submitted on a onetime basis prior to the award of a project

grant identified under this part if such

information has not been provided

previously under this or another

program for which the sponsoring

agency is responsible. Copies of the

forms used to fulfill this requirement

will be sent to the proposing institution

by the sponsoring agency as part of the

pre-award process.

(c) Notice of grant award. The grant

award document shall include at a

minimum the following:

(1) Legal name and address of

performing organization.

(2) Title of project.

(3) Name(s) and address(es) of project

director(s).

(4) Identifying grant number assigned

by the Department.

(5) Project period, which specifies

how long the Department intends to

support the effort without requiring

reapplication for funds.

(6) Total amount of Federal financial

assistance approved during the project

period.

(7) Legal authority(ies) under which

the grant is awarded.

(8) Approved budget plan for

categorizing allocable project funds to

accomplish the stated purpose of the

grant award.

(9) Other information or provisions

deemed necessary by the Department to

carry out its granting activities or to

accomplish the purpose of this

particular project grant.

(d) Obligation of the Federal

Government. Neither the approval of

any application nor the award of any

project grant shall legally commit or

obligate CSREES or the United States to

provide further support of a project or

any portion thereof.

§ 3405.18 Use of funds; changes.

(a) Delegation of fiscal responsibility.

The grantee may not in whole or in part

delegate or transfer to another person,

institution, or organization the

responsibility for use or expenditure of

grant funds.

(b) Change in project plans. (1) The

permissible changes by the grantee,

project director(s), or other key project

personnel in the approved project grant

shall be limited to changes in

methodology, techniques, or other

aspects of the project to expedite

achievement of the project’s approved

goals. If the grantee or the project

director(s) are uncertain as to whether a

change complies with this provision,

the question must be referred to the

Department for a final determination.

(2) Changes in approved goals, or

objectives, shall be requested by the

grantee and approved in writing by the

authorized departmental officer prior to

effecting such changes. In no event shall

requests for such changes be approved

that are outside the scope of the

approved project.

(3) Changes in approved project

leadership or the replacement or

reassignment of other key project

personnel shall be requested by the

grantee and approved in writing by the

authorized departmental officer prior to

effecting such changes.

(4) Transfers of actual performance of

the substantive programmatic work in

whole or in part and provisions for

payment of funds, whether or not

Federal funds are involved, shall be

requested by the grantee and approved

in writing by the authorized

departmental officer prior to effecting

such transfers.

(c) Changes in project period. The

project period may be extended by the

authorized departmental officer without

additional financial support for such

additional period(s) as the authorized

departmental officer determines may be

necessary to complete or fulfill the

purposes of an approved project.

However, due to statutory restriction, no

grant may be extended beyond five

years from the original start date of the

grant. Grant extensions shall be

conditioned upon prior request by the

grantee and approval in writing by the

authorized departmental officer.

(d) Changes in approved budget.

Changes in an approved budget shall be

requested by the grantee and approved

in writing by the authorized

departmental officer prior to instituting

such changes if the revision will:

(1) Involve transfers of amounts

budgeted for indirect costs to absorb an

increase in direct costs;

(2) Involve transfers of amounts

budgeted for direct costs to

accommodate changes in indirect cost

rates negotiated during a budget period

and not approved when a grant was

awarded; or

(3) Involve transfers or expenditures

of amounts requiring prior approval as

set forth in the applicable Federal cost

principles, Departmental regulations, or

in the grant award.

§ 3405.19 Monitoring progress of funded

projects.

(a) During the tenure of a grant,

project directors must attend at least one

national project directors meeting, if

offered, in Washington, D.C. or any

other announced location. The purpose

of the meeting will be to discuss project

and grant management, opportunities

for collaborative efforts, future

directions for education reform, and

opportunities to enhance dissemination

of exemplary end products/results.

(b) An Annual Performance Report

must be submitted to the USDA program

contact person within 90 days after the

completion of the first year of the

project and annually thereafter during

the life of the grant. Generally, the

Annual Performance Reports should

include a summary of the overall

progress toward project objectives,

current problems or unusual

developments, the next year’s activities,

and any other information that is

pertinent to the ongoing project or

which may be specified in the terms and

conditions of the award.

(c) A Final Performance Report must

be submitted to the USDA program

contact person within 90 days after the

expiration date of the project. The

expiration date is specified in the award

documents and modifications thereto, if

any. Generally, the Final Performance

Report should be a summary of the

completed project, including: A review

of project objectives and

accomplishments; a description of any

products and outcomes resulting from

the project; activities undertaken to
65454 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 19, 1995 / Proposed Rules

disseminate products and outcomes;

partnerships and collaborative ventures

that resulted from the project; future

initiatives that are planned as a result of

the project; the impact of the project on

the project director(s), the institution,

and the food and agricultural sciences

higher education system; and data on

project personnel and beneficiaries. The

Final Performance Report should be

accompanied by samples or copies of

any products or publications resulting

from or developed by the project. The

Final Performance Report must also

contain any other information which

may be specified in the terms and

conditions of the award.

§ 3405.20 Other Federal statutes and

regulations that apply.

Several other Federal statutes and

regulations apply to grant proposals

considered for review and to project

grants awarded under this part. These

include but are not limited to:

7 CFR part 1 Subpart A—USDA

implementation of Freedom of Information

Act.

7 CFR part 3—USDA implementation of

OMB Circular No. A–129 regarding debt

collection.

7 CFR part 15, Subpart A—USDA

implementation of Title VI of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964, as amended.

7 CFR part 3015—USDA Uniform Federal

Assistance Regulations, implementing OMB

directives (i.e., Circular Nos. A–21 and A–

122) and incorporating provisions of 31

U.S.C. 6301–6308 (formerly the Federal Grant

and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, Pub.

L. No. 95–224), as well as general policy

requirements applicable to recipients of

Departmental financial assistance.

7 CFR part 3017, as amended—

Governmentwide Debarment Suspension

(Nonprocurement); Governmentwide

Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace

(Grants), implementing Executive Order

12549 on debarment and suspension and the

Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (41 U.S.C.

701).

7 CFR part 3018—Restrictions on

Lobbying, prohibiting the use of appropriated

funds to influence Congress or a Federal

agency in connection with the making of any

Federal grant and other Federal contracting

and financial transactions.

7 CFR part 3019—USDA implementation

of OMB Circular A–110, Uniform

Administrative Requirements for Grants and

Agreements With Institutions of Higher

Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit

Organizations.

7 CFR part 3051—USDA implementation

of OMB Circular No. A–133 regarding audits

of institutions of higher education and other

nonprofit institutions.

29 U.S.C. 794, section 504—Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, and 7 CFR Part 15B (USDA

implementation of statute), prohibiting

discrimination based upon physical or

mental handicap in Federally assisted

programs.

35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.—Bayh-Dole Act,

controlling allocation of rights to inventions

made by employees of small business firms

and domestic nonprofit organizations,

including universities, in Federally assisted

programs (implementing regulations are

contained in 37 CFR part 401).

§ 3405.21 Confidential aspects of

proposals and awards.

When a proposal results in a grant, it

becomes a part of the record of the

Agency’s transactions, available to the

public upon specific request.

Information that the Secretary

determines to be of a privileged nature

will be held in confidence to the extent

permitted by law. Therefore, any

information that the applicant wishes to

have considered as privileged should be

clearly marked as such and sent in a

separate statement, two copies of which

should accompany the proposal. The

original copy of a proposal that does not

result in a grant will be retained by the

Agency for a period of one year. Other

copies will be destroyed. Such a

proposal will be released only with the

consent of the applicant or to the extent

required by law. A proposal may be

withdrawn at any time prior to the final

action thereon.

§ 3405.22 Evaluation of program.

Grantees should be aware that

CSREES may, as a part of its own

program evaluation activities, carry out

in-depth evaluations of assisted

activities. Thus, grantees should be

prepared to cooperate with CSREES

personnel, or persons retained by

CSREES, evaluating the institutional

context and the impact of any supported

project. Grantees may be asked to

provide general information on any

students and faculty supported, in

whole or in part, by a grant awarded

under this program; information that

may be requested includes, but is not

limited to, standardized academic

achievement test scores, grade point

average, academic standing, career

patterns, age, race/ethnicity, gender,

citizenship, and disability.

Done at Washington, DC, this 11th day of

December, 1995.

Colien Hefferan,

Acting Administrator, Cooperative State

Research, Education, and Extension Service.

[FR Doc. 95–30626 Filed 12–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–22–M