1

January 27, 2016

ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDING OPPORTUNITY (FFO)

Award Competitions for Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) 

Centers in the States of Alabama, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Louisiana, 

Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Utah and 

Vermont

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• Federal Agency Name: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 

United States Department of Commerce (DoC)

• Funding Opportunity Title: Award Competitions for Hollings Manufacturing 

Extension Partnership (MEP) Centers in the States of Alabama, Arkansas, 

California, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Utah and Vermont

• Announcement Type: Initial

• Funding Opportunity Number: 2016-NIST-MEP-01

• Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 11.611, 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership

• Dates: Electronic applications must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on Monday, April 25, 2016. Paper applications will not be accepted. 

Applications received after the deadline will not be reviewed or considered. 

Applicants should be aware, and factor in their application submission 

planning, that the Grants.gov system is expected to be closed for routine 

maintenance at these times: from 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, Saturday, February 

20, 2016 until Monday, February 22, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. Eastern Time; and from 

12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, Saturday, February 20, 2016 until Monday, February 

22, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. Eastern Time; and from 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, 

Saturday, March 19, 2016 until Monday, March 21, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. Eastern 

Time. Applications cannot be submitted when Grants.gov is closed.

The approximate start date for the awards made under this FFO is expected to be 

October 1, 2016. 

When developing your submission timeline, please keep in mind that (1) all 

applicants are required to have a current registration in the System for Award 

Management (SAM.gov); (2) the free annual registration process in the electronic 

System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (see Section IV.3. and Section 

IV.7.a.(1).b). of this FFO) may take between three and five business days, or as long 

as more than two weeks; and (3) electronic applicants are required to have a current 
2

registration in Grants.gov; and (4) applicants will receive a series of e-mail 

messages from Grants.gov over a period of up to two business days before learning 

whether a Federal agency’s electronic system has received its application. Please 

note that a federal assistance award cannot be issued if the designated recipient’s 

registration in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) is not current at the 

time of the award.

• Application Submission: Applications must be submitted electronically through 

www.grants.gov. NIST will not accept applications submitted by mail, facsimile, or 

by e-mail. See Sections IV.2.b.(1)., IV.2.b.(2)., and IV.2.b.(7). in the Full 

Announcement Text of this FFO.

• Funding Opportunity Description: NIST invites applications from eligible 

organizations in connection with NIST’s funding up to thirteen (13) separate MEP 

cooperative agreements for the operation of MEP Centers in the designated States’

service areas and in the funding amounts identified in Section II.2. of this FFO. 

NIST anticipates awarding one (1) cooperative agreement for each of the identified 

States. The objective of the MEP Center Program is to provide manufacturing 

extension services to primarily small and medium-sized manufacturers within the 

States designated in this FFO. The selected organization will become part of the 

MEP national system of extension service providers, currently located throughout 

the United States and Puerto Rico.

• Anticipated Amounts: NIST anticipates funding up to thirteen (13) MEP Center

awards with a five-year period of performance and in annual federal funding 

amounts identified in Section II.2. of this FFO. As discussed in the multi-year 

funding policy described in Section II.3. of this FFO, obligated funding amounts may 

be adjusted higher or lower from year-to-year of the award. In addition, as set forth 

in Section II.4. of this FFO, awards issued pursuant to this FFO may be renewed by 

NIST on a non-competitive basis for a subsequent period of up to five (5) years, 

based upon the recipient’s satisfactory performance, continued relevance of the 

project to the mission and priorities of the MEP program, and the availability of 

appropriated funds. 

• Funding Instrument: Cooperative Agreement. See Section II.1. of this FFO for 

additional information concerning the funding instrument for this award.

• Who Is Eligible: The eligibility requirements set forth in Section III.1 of this FFO will 

be used in lieu of and to the extent they are inconsistent with will supersede those 

given in the MEP regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, specifically 15 CFR § 

290.5(a)(1). Each applicant for and recipient of an MEP award must be a U.S.-

based nonprofit institution or organization. For the purpose of this FFO, nonprofit 

institutions include public and private nonprofit organizations, nonprofit or State 

colleges and universities, public or nonprofit community and technical colleges, and 

State, local or Tribal governments. Existing MEP awardees and new applicants that 

meet the eligibility criteria set forth in Section III.1. of this FFO may apply. An 
3

eligible organization may work individually or may include proposed subawards to 

eligible organizations or proposed contracts with any other organization as part of 

the applicant’s proposal, effectively forming a team. However, as discussed in 

Section I.4. of this FFO, NIST generally will not fund applications that propose an 

organizational or operational structure that, in whole or in part, delegates or transfers 

to another person, institution, or organization the applicant’s responsibility for core 

MEP Center management and Oversight functions. In addition, the applicant must 

have or propose an Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance

structure or plan for establishing a board structure within 90 days from the award 

start date (Refer to Section I.3. of this FFO).

 

• Cost Sharing Requirements: This Program requires non-Federal cost share of at 

least 50 percent of the total allowable project costs for the first through the third 

years of operation, with increasing minimum non-Federal cost share requirements 

beginning in year four (4) of the award. See Section III.2. of this FFO for more 

information on the non-federal cost sharing requirements under MEP awards.

• Webinar Information Session: NIST/MEP will hold one or more webinar 

information sessions for organizations that are considering applying for this funding 

opportunity. These webinars will provide general information regarding MEP and 

offer general guidance on preparing proposals. NIST/MEP staff will be available at

the webinars to answer general questions. During the webinars, proprietary 

technical discussions about specific project ideas will not be permitted. Also, 

NIST/MEP staff will not critique or provide feedback on any specific project ideas 

during the webinars or at any time before submission of a proposal to MEP. 

However, NIST/MEP staff will provide information about the MEP eligibility and costsharing requirements, evaluation criteria and selection factors, the selection process, 

and the general characteristics of a competitive MEP proposal during this webinar.

The webinars will be held approximately fifteen (15) to thirty (30) business days after 

posting of this FFO. The exact dates and times of the webinars will be posted on the 

MEP website at http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm. The webinars will 

be recorded, and a link to the recordings will be posted on the MEP website. In 

addition, the webinar presentations will be available on the MEP website. 

Organizations wishing to participate in one or more of the webinars must register in 

advance by contacting MEP by email at mepffo@nist.gov. Participation in the 

webinars is not required in order for an organization to submit an application 

pursuant to this FFO.

• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). Questions from applicants pertaining to 

MEP eligibility, cost-sharing requirements, evaluation criteria and selection factors, 

the selection process, and the general characteristics of a competitive MEP proposal 

will not be considered on an informal basis. Applicants must submit all such 

questions in writing to mepffo@nist.gov. Questions submitted to NIST/MEP may be 

made available to the public as part of an FAQ document, which will be periodically 

updated on the MEP website at http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm. 
4

Table of Contents

I. Program Description .............................................................................................4

II. Federal Award Information ...................................................................................8

III. Eligibility Information..........................................................................................11

IV. Application and Submission Information..........................................................12

V. Application Review Information .........................................................................23

VI. Federal Award Administration Information .......................................................31

VII. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ................................................................33

VIII. Other Information.................................................................................................34

FULL ANNOUNCEMENT TEXT

I. Program Description

As required by the MEP regulations, 15 CFR Part 290, specifically 15 CFR § 290.7, this 

funding opportunity is also announced in the Federal Register. In the event of any 

inconsistency between this FFO and the notice published in the Federal Register, the 

notice published in the Federal Register controls.

1. About the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership

The National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Hollings Manufacturing 

Extension Partnership (MEP) works with small and medium-sized U.S. manufacturers to 

help them create and retain jobs, increase profits, and save time and money. The 

nationwide network provides a variety of services, from innovation strategies to process 

improvements to sustainable manufacturing, supply chain and technology acceleration 

services. MEP centers also work with partners at the State and Federal levels on 

programs that put manufacturers in position to develop new customers, expand into 

new markets and create new products. 

As a program of the U.S. Department of Commerce, MEP offers a range of effective 

resources to help manufacturers identify opportunities that will accelerate and 

strengthen their growth and competitiveness in the global marketplace. 

2. The National Network

MEP is a nationwide network of more than 1,200 technical experts - located in every 

State - serving as trusted business advisors focused on transforming U.S. 

manufacturers to compete globally, supporting supply chain integration, and providing

access to technology for improved productivity. MEP is built around manufacturing 

extension centers locally positioned throughout the 50 States and Puerto Rico. MEP 

Centers are a diverse network of State, non-profit university-based, and other non-profit 

organizations, offering products and services that address the critical needs of their 

local manufacturers. 
5

Each MEP Center works directly with area manufacturers to provide expertise and 

services tailored to their most critical needs, ranging from process improvement and 

workforce development to business practices and technology transfer. Additionally,

MEP Centers connect manufacturers with government and trade associations, 

universities and research laboratories, and a host of other public and private resources 

to help them realize individual business goals. 

Through local and national resources, MEP Centers have helped thousands of 

manufacturers reinvent themselves, increase profits, create jobs and establish a 

foundation for long-term business growth and productivity.

3. Oversight Board and/or Advisory Committee and Governance

a. Oversight Board

Recipients will be required to establish and maintain an Oversight Board, which has 

fiduciary responsibility for the governance and operation of the recipient 

organization. The Oversight Board shall be broadly representative of State service 

area stakeholders with a majority of the Oversight Board members drawn from 

small- and medium-sized manufacturing firms. Members of the Oversight Board 

may not concurrently serve on more than one MEP Center Oversight Board or serve 

as a vendor or provide contractual services to the Recipient or to a Subrecipient. 

Additionally, recipients shall adopt bylaws or equivalent governance documents 

setting forth the roles, responsibilities, and procedures of their Oversight Boards, 

including a conflict of interest policy to ensure relevant relationships are disclosed 

and appropriate recusal procedures are in place. Upon request, an applicant shall

provide the NIST Grants Officer with copies of its organizational documents, 

including articles of incorporation or charters, ratified by-laws and conflict of interest 

policies.

b. Advisory Committee

A recipient of an MEP Center cooperative agreement that is an Institution of Higher 

Education, State, Tribal or local governmental entity, where state law or policy 

prohibits compliance with the Oversight Board requirement, may establish an 

Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee shall be broadly representative of 

State service area stakeholders with a majority of its members drawn from smalland medium-sized manufacturing firms and provide regular strategic, policy, and 

programmatic input directly to the designated representative of the applicant. A 

recipient that is a nonprofit organization with multiple programs and MEP Center 

program activities are not a primary activity of the applicant may establish an 

Advisory Committee, instead of an Oversight Board, that conforms to membership 

requirements as set forth above.

In determining whether the MEP Center is a primary activity of a recipient, MEP will 

consider unique factors and circumstances such as, but not limited to, (1) the 
6

proportion of MEP Center funding (both federal dollars and non-federal match) 

relative to the applicant’s funding [or budget] for its other programs and activities, or

(2) the duration of other funding sources over time.

Advisory Committee members may not concurrently serve on more than one MEP 

Center Advisory Committee or serve as a vendor or provide contractual services to 

the applicant or to a Subrecipient. Recipients shall have bylaws or equivalent 

governance documents setting forth the roles, responsibilities, and procedures of its 

Advisory Committee, including a conflict of interest policy to ensure relevant 

relationships are disclosed and appropriate recusal procedures are in place. Upon 

request, an applicant shall provide the NIST Grants Officer copies of the

organizational documents for its Advisory Committee, including ratified by-laws and 

conflict of interest policies.

c. New/Proposed Oversight and/or Advisory Committee

If an Oversight Board or Advisory Committee meeting the requirements of this section 

is not in place at the time an application is submitted, the applicant must submit a 

plan for establishing such structure, including Oversight Board or Advisory Committee 

membership criteria. Upon request, an applicant shall provide the NIST Grants 

Officer copies of the organizational documents for its proposed Oversight or Advisory 

Committee and Governance, including draft by-laws and conflict of interest policies. 

An awardee will have up to 90 calendar days from award start date (expected to be 

October 1, 2016) to establish its Oversight Board or the Advisory Committee and 

Governance, as the case may be. The sufficiency of the proposed Oversight or

Advisory Committee Board and Governance will be evaluated against an evaluation 

criterion (see Section V.1.b.ii. of this FFO).

No federal award funds will be released to an awardee until the NIST Grants Officer, 

in consultation with the MEP Program Office, determines that its Oversight Board or

Advisory Committee and Governance is in conformance with the requirements set 

forth in this section.

4. MEP Core Management and Oversight Functions 

An MEP Center, as a direct recipient of Federal financial assistance funds under 

an MEP cooperative agreement, must possess and maintain, at all times during 

an MEP award period, accountability to directly manage and execute all functions 

material and inherent to the successful operation of a Center, which include, but 

are not limited to, the following: 

1. Budget execution, including the responsibility for determining and executing 

budget policy, guidance and strategy, and the determination of program 

priorities and associated budget or funding requests;

2. Policy implementation, including the responsibility for determining the 

content and implementation of financial and program policies and procedures 
7

impacting the recipient’s MEP project;

3. Human resources management, including the responsibility for selecting 

individuals for Center employment and for selecting contractors and the 

direction, control, and performance management of Center employees and 

oversight of contractors; and

4. Strategic planning and project execution and management, including the 

responsibility for:

a. Strategic planning functions such as the following: determination of 

project requirements, approval of a project implementation strategy, and 

the development and monitoring of agreements and statements of work 

with subrecipients, vendors, third-party contributors and other strategic 

partners; and 

b. Project execution and management functions such as submission of 

required financial and technical reports, maintenance of a functioning 

financial management system that satisfies the requirements found in 2 

CFR Section 200.302, in order to ensure that costs charged against an 

MEP award are reasonable, allocable, and allowable under applicable 

federal cost principles; and adherence to the terms and conditions of 

the MEP award.

In extraordinary situations, the NIST Grants Officer may allow a recipient to 

temporarily outsource certain or all of its management and oversight 

responsibilities under an MEP award. If an applicant is proposing such a 

structure, the applicant must include with its application a detailed explanation and 

accompanying documentation (e.g., copies of draft contracts or other agreements) 

supporting its outsourcing request.

The sufficiency of the proposed Core Management and Oversight Functions will 

be evaluated against an evaluation criterion (see Section V.1.b.i. of this FFO).

5. Resources 

The following resources are currently available on the MEP website at: 

http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm:

• System Strategic Plan;

• Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership Operating Plan Guidelines;

• Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership General Terms and Conditions

(see also Section VI.2.e. of this FFO); and

• 2014 Annual Report.

The MEP Program is not a Federal research and development program. It is not the 

intent of this program that awardees will perform systematic research.

To learn more about the MEP Program, please go to http://www.nist.gov/mep/.
8

Refer to Section VII. of this FFO, Federal Awarding Agency Contacts, Grant Rules and 

Regulations, if you seek the information at this link and it is no longer working, or if you 

seek information at any link in this FFO and it is no longer working, or if you need more 

information.

The statutory authority for the MEP Program is 15 U.S.C. 278k, as implemented in 15 

CFR part 290.

II. Federal Award Information

1. Funding Instrument. The funding instrument that will be used for the awards 

issued pursuant to this FFO is a cooperative agreement. The nature of NIST’s 

“substantial involvement” will generally be collaboration between NIST/MEP and the 

recipient organizations. This includes NIST/MEP collaboration with a recipient on its 

progress and approving changes in the statement of work. Additional forms of 

substantial involvement that may arise are described in Final Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Guidance Implementing the Federal Grant and Cooperative 

Agreement Act, 43 Fed. Reg. 36860-65 (Aug. 18, 1978) and in Chapter 5.C of the 

Department of Commerce Grants and Cooperative Agreements Manual, as may be 

periodically amended, which is available at http://go.usa.gov/SNJd.

Examples of NIST involvement in cooperative agreements awarded pursuant to this 

FFO may include activities such as, but not limited to:

• Guidelines and assistance in developing required plans;

• Guidance for evaluation of performance and collection of data and information 

from the Recipient organization;

• Approval of key personnel;

• Assistance, where possible, in accessing solutions to technical and managerial 

problems; and

• Assistance to the Recipient organization to define, understand, and resolve 

issues pertaining to the successful implementation of the MEP project.

For further information related to NIST’s substantial involvement in this award, 

please refer to the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership General Terms and 

Conditions to which a link is located in Section VI.2.e. of this FFO.

2. Funding Availability. NIST anticipates funding thirteen (13) MEP Center awards 

with an initial five-year period of performance in accordance with the multi-year 

funding policy described in Section II.3. of this FFO. Initial funding for the awards

listed below is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds.

The table below lists the thirteen (13) States identified for funding as part of this FFO

and the estimated amount of funding available for each:
9

MEP Center Location

and Assigned 

Geographical Service 

Area (by State)1

Anticipated Annual 

Federal Funding for 

Each Year of the Award

Total Federal Funding 

for 5 Year Award 

Period

Alabama $1,780,800 $8,904,000

Arkansas $971,218 $4,856,065

California $14,046,449 $70,232,245

Georgia $2,693,482 $13,467,410

Louisiana $1,197,546 $5,987,730

Massachusetts $2,467,879 $12,339,395

Missouri $2,207,873 $11,039,365

Montana $512,000 $2,,560,000

Ohio $5,246,822 $26,234,110

Pennsylvania $5,280,586 $26,402,930

Puerto Rico $643,133 $3,215,665

Utah $1,147,573 $5,737,865

Vermont $500,000 $2,500,000

Applicants may propose annual Federal funding amounts that are different from the 

anticipated annual Federal funding amounts set forth in the above table, provided 

that the total amount of Federal funding being requested by an Applicant does not 

exceed the total amount of federal funding for the five-year award period as set forth 

in the above table. For example, if the anticipated annual Federal funding amount 

for an MEP Center is $500,000 and the total Federal funding amount for the fiveyear award period is $2,500,000, an Applicant may propose Federal funding 

amounts greater, less than, or equal to $500,000 for any year or years of the award, 

so long as the total amount of Federal funding being requested by the Applicant for 

the entire five-year award period does not exceed $2,500,000.

3. Multi-Year Funding Policy. When an application for a multi-year award is 

approved, funding will usually be provided for only the first year of the project. 

Recipients will be required to submit detailed budgets and budget narratives prior to 

the award of any continued funding. Continued funding for the remaining years of 

the project will be awarded by NIST on a non-competitive basis, and may be 

adjusted higher or lower from year-to-year of the award, contingent upon satisfactory 

performance, continued relevance to the mission and priorities of the program, and 

the availability of funds. Continuation of an award to extend the period of 

performance and/or to increase or decrease funding is at the sole discretion of NIST.

4. Potential for Additional 5 Years. Initial awards issued pursuant to this FFO are

 

1 The States of Ohio and Utah were included in a prior round of MEP Center award competitions (see 80 FR 12451 

(March 9, 2015) and NIST Funding Opportunity Number 2015-NIST-MEP-01), which did not result in an 

application being selected for funding. As a result, NIST is announcing competition for these two States as part of 

this round of MEP Center award competitions. 
10

expected to be for up to five (5) years with the possibility for NIST to renew the 

award, on a non-competitive basis, for an additional 5 years at the end of the initial 

award period. The review processes in 15 CFR 290.8 will be used as part of the 

overall assessment of the recipient, consistent with the potential long-term nature 

and purpose of the program. In considering renewal for a second five-year, multiyear award term, NIST will evaluate the results of the annual reviews and the results 

of the 3rd Year peer-based Panel Review findings and recommendations as set forth 

in 15 CFR 290.8, as well as the Center’s progress in addressing findings and 

recommendations made during the various reviews. The full process is expected to 

include programmatic, policy, financial, administrative, and responsibility 

assessments, and the availability of funds, consistent with Department of Commerce 

and NIST policies and procedures in effect at that time.

5. Kick-Off Conference. Each recipient will be required to attend a kick-off 

conference, which will be held within 30 days post start date of award, to help 

ensure that the MEP Center operator has a clear understanding of the program and 

its components. The kick-off conference will take place at NIST/MEP headquarters 

in Gaithersburg, MD, during which time NIST will: (1) orient MEP Center key 

personnel to the MEP program; (2) explain program and financial reporting 

requirements and procedures; (3) identify available resources that can enhance the 

capabilities of the MEP Center; and (4) negotiate and develop a detailed three-year 

operating plan with the recipient. NIST/MEP anticipates an additional set of site 

visits at the MEP Center and/or telephonic meetings with the recipient to finalize the 

three-year operating plan.

The kick-off conference will take up to approximately three days and must be 

attended by the MEP Center Director, along with up to two additional MEP Center 

employees. Applicants must include travel and related costs for the kick-off 

conference as part of the budget for year one (1), and these costs should be 

reflected in the SF-424A form. (See Section IV.2.a.(2). of this FFO.) These costs 

must also be reflected in the budget table and budget narrative for year 1, which is 

submitted as part of the budget tables and budget narratives section of the Technical 

Proposal. (See Section IV.2.a.(6).(e). of this FFO.) Representatives from key 

subrecipients and other key strategic partners may attend the kick-off conference 

with the prior written approval of the Grants Officer. Applicants proposing to have 

key subrecipients and/or other key strategic partners attend the kick-off conference 

should clearly indicate so as part of the budget narrative for year one of the project. 

6. MEP System-Wide Meetings. NIST/MEP typically organizes system-wide

meetings approximately four times a year in an effort to share best practices, new 

and emerging trends, and additional topics of interest. These meetings are rotated 

throughout the United States and typically involve 3-4 days of resource time and 

associated travel costs for each meeting. The MEP Center Director must attend 

these meetings, along with up to two additional MEP Center employees. 
11

Applicants must include travel and related costs for four quarterly MEP system-wide 

meetings in each of the five (5) project years (4 meetings per year; 20 total meetings 

over five-year award period). These costs must be reflected in the SF-424A form

(see Section IV.2.a.(2). of this FFO. These costs must also be reflected in the 

budget tables and budget narratives for each of the project’s five (5) years, which 

are submitted in the budget tables and budget narratives section of the Technical 

Proposal. (See Section IV.2.a.(6).(e). of this FFO). 

7. Indirect (F&A) Costs. NIST will reimburse applicants for proposed indirect (F&A) 

costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200.414. Applicants proposing indirect (F&A) costs 

must follow the application requirements set forth in Section IV.2.a.(8). of this FFO. 

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants. The eligibility requirements set forth below will be used in lieu 

of and to the extent they are inconsistent with will supersede those given in the 

MEP regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, specifically 15 CFR 290.5(a)(1). Each 

applicant for and recipient of an MEP award must be a U.S.-based nonprofit 

institution or organization. For the purpose of this FFO, nonprofit institutions include 

public or private nonprofit organizations, nonprofit or State colleges and universities,

public or nonprofit community and technical colleges, and State, local or Tribal 

governments. Existing MEP awardees and new applicants who meet the eligibility 

criteria set forth in this section may apply. An eligible organization may work 

individually or may include proposed subawards to eligible organizations or 

proposed contracts with any other organization as part of the applicant’s proposal, 

effectively forming a team. However, as discussed in Section I.4. of this FFO, NIST 

generally will not fund applications that propose an organizational or operational 

structure that, in whole or in part, delegates or transfers to another person, 

institution, or organization the applicant’s responsibility for MEP Center Core 

Management and Oversight functions. In addition, the applicant must propose an 

Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance structure or plan for 

establishing a board structure within 90 days from the award start date (Refer to 

Section I.3. of this FFO). See also Section IV.6. of this FFO for funding restrictions 

under the MEP Program. 

2. Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement. Non-Federal cost sharing of at least 50 

percent of the total project costs is required for each of the first through the third year 

of the award, with an increasing minimum non-federal cost share contribution 

beginning in year 4 of the award as follows:

Award Year Maximum NIST Share Minimum Non-Federal 

Share

1-3 1/2 1/2

4 2/5 3/5

5 and beyond 1/3 2/3
12

Non-Federal cost sharing is that portion of the project costs not borne by the Federal 

Government. The applicant’s share of the MEP Center expenses may include cash, 

services, and third party in-kind contributions, as described at 2 CFR 200.306, as 

applicable, and in the MEP program regulations at 15 CFR 290.4(c). No more than 

50% of the applicant’s total non-Federal cost share for any year of the award may be

from third party in-kind contributions of part-time personnel, equipment, software, 

rental value of centrally located space, and related contributions, per 15 CFR 

290.4(c)(5). The source and detailed rationale of the cost share, including cash, fulland part-time personnel, and in-kind donations, must be documented in the budget 

tables and budget narratives submitted with the application and will be considered 

as part of the review under the evaluation criterion found in Section V.1.c.ii. of this 

FFO. 

Recipients must meet the minimum non-federal cost share requirements for 

each year of the award as identified in the chart above. For purposes of the 

MEP Program, “program income” (as defined in 2 CFR 200.80, as applicable) 

generated by an MEP Center may be used by a recipient towards the required 

non-federal cost share under an MEP award. 

As with the Federal share, any proposed costs included as non-Federal cost sharing 

must be an allowable/eligible cost under this program and under the Federal cost 

principles set forth in 2 CFR part 200, Subpart E. Non-Federal cost sharing 

incorporated into the budget of an approved MEP cooperative agreement is subject 

to audit in the same general manner as Federal award funds. See 2 CFR part 200, 

Subpart F. 

As set forth in Section IV.2.a.(7) of this FFO, a letter of commitment is required from 

an authorized representative of the applicant, stating the total amount of cost share 

to be contributed by the applicant towards the proposed MEP Center. Letters of 

commitment for all other third-party sources of non-Federal cost sharing identified in 

a proposal are not required, but are strongly encouraged. 

3. Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance. The applicant must 

include in their application a proposed board structure including the type of board, 

board member names, organization and roles of such board members. If such a 

board is not in place, or is not expected to meet these requirements at the time of 

the MEP award, the applicant must provide a plan for establishing such a board 

within 90 days of award start date (expected to be October 1, 2016).

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Address to Request Application Package. The standard application package, 

consisting of the standard forms, i.e., SF-424, SF-424A, SF-424B, SF-LLL, and the 

CD-511, is available at www.grants.gov under 2016-NIST-MEP-01. Applicants may 
13

also request an application package by contacting the point of contact for 

administrative, budget, cost-sharing, eligibility questions and other programmatic 

questions listed in Section VII. of this FFO. 

2. Content and Form of Application/Submission. The requirements given in this 

section of the FFO will be used in lieu of and to the extent they are inconsistent with 

will supersede those given in the MEP regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, 

specifically 15 CFR § 290.5.

a. Required Forms and Documents

(1) SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance. Applicants must indicate 

the State in which they are seeking to establish an MEP Center in field 4, 

Applicant Identifier, of the SF-424. The SF-424 must be certified through 

www.grants.gov by an authorized representative of the applicant

organization. 

SF-424, Item 12, should list the FFO number as 2016-NIST-MEP-01.

SF-424, Item 18, should list the total budget information for full five (5) 

years of the project.

The list of certifications and assurances referenced in Item 21 of the SF424 is contained in the SF-424B. 

 

(2) SF-424A, Budget Information - Non-Construction Programs. The 

budget should reflect anticipated expenses for all five (5) years of the 

project, considering all potential cost increases, including cost of living 

adjustments. Recipients must meet the minimum cost share and 

matching requirements set forth in this FFO. Please refer to Section III.2.

of this FFO for the Cost Share and Matching Requirement over the life of 

the award. The budget should also include staff, travel and other costs 

associated with the NIST/MEP Kick-Off Conference and System-Wide 

meetings as described in Sections II.5 and II.6 of this FFO. 

Please carefully follow the directions found at: 

http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/form-instructions/sf-424ainstructions.html when filling out this form. 

The Grant Program Function or Activity on Line 1 under Column (a) should be 

entered as Manufacturing Extension Partnership. The Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance Number on Line 1 under Column (b) should be 11.611.

(3) SF-424B, Assurances - Non-Construction Programs.

(4) CD-511, Certification Regarding Lobbying.
14

(5) SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. (if applicable)

(6) Technical Proposal. The five (5) year Technical Proposal is a wordprocessed document not exceeding 40 pages responsive to the program 

description (see Section I. of this FFO) and the evaluation criteria (see

Section V.1. of this FFO). The following is a suggested format that 

applicants may use for the technical proposal.

a) Table of Contents. (Does not count toward the page limit).

b) Executive Summary. The executive summary should briefly (usually 

no longer than two pages) describe the proposed project, consistent 

with the evaluation sub-criteria (see Section V.1.a. of this FFO). 

Applicants should name the State in which they are seeking to 

establish an MEP Center in the first sentence of the Executive 

Summary. 

Please note, if an applicant’s proposal is selected for funding, NIST 

may use all or a portion of the Executive Summary as part of a press 

release issued by NIST, or for other public information and outreach 

purposes. Applicants are advised not to incorporate information that 

concerns business trade secrets or other confidential commercial or 

financial information as part of the Executive Summary. See also 15 

CFR 4.9(c) concerning the designation of business information by the 

applicant. (Does not count towards page limit).

 

c) Project Narrative. A description of the proposed approach to 

establish an MEP Center. The project narrative must also identify 

tasks, measureable milestones and outcomes in providing

manufacturing extension services to primarily small and medium-sized 

manufacturers separately for each of the five years in the designated 

State (see Section II.2. of this FFO), sufficient to permit evaluation of 

the application, in accordance with the Executive Summary and Project 

Narrative evaluation sub-criteria (see Section V.1.a. of this FFO). If 

relevant, an applicant should provide information that helps the 

reviewers understand the past experience of the applicant in serving 

small and mid-sized manufacturers. 

d) Qualifications of the Applicant; Key Personnel, Organizational 

Structure and Oversight Board or Advisory Committee

Governance. A description of the qualifications and proposed Center

operational or management activities of key personnel who will be 

assigned to work on the proposed project, and a description of 

program management plans, sufficient to permit evaluation of the 

application, in accordance with the Qualifications of the Applicant sub-
15

criteria (see Sections V.1.a.iv., V.1.b.i. and ii. of this FFO). The 

applicant should include a description of its proposed structure for 

executing the MEP Core Management and Oversight Functions as 

described in Section I.4 of this FFO. The applicant must provide 

enough information for NIST to determine whether the proposed 

structure meets the requirements of Section I.4. The applicant should 

also provide a description of its established or proposed MEP Center 

Oversight Board or Advisory Committee, as the case may be, and 

Governance, including a listing of the members or intended members 

and a discussion of the governing documents (e.g., bylaws, policies or 

procedures and conflict of interest policies) with enough information for 

NIST to determine whether the proposed Oversight Board or Advisory 

Committee and Governance meets the requirements of Section I.3 of 

this FFO. If an applicant’s Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and 

Governance does not currently meet the requirements set forth in 

Section I.3 of this FFO or is not expected to meet these requirements 

at the time of the MEP award, the applicant must provide a feasible 

plan to bring its Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and 

Governance into compliance with Section I.3 of the FFO within 90 days

of award start date (expected to be October 1, 2016).

e) Budget Tables and Budget Narratives. In addition to the SF-424A 

form (see Sections IV.2.a.(2). of this FFO), applicants must provide a 

detailed budget table and budget narrative for year one (1) of the 

project, fully explaining and justifying all proposed project funding (both 

revenue and expenses) in accordance with applicable federal cost 

principles. Applicants must also provide a budget table for years two 

(2) through five (5) of the project; however, a budget narrative for these 

years is not required as part of an application. 

 In the budget narrative, the recipient should provide adequate 

information to support the costs identified in each category of the 

budget table. For example, providing the annual salary and the 

percentage of time dedicated to the project by personnel to 

demonstrate the total cost of that individual; providing the airfare, 

lodging, per diem, number of days and number of travelers for each 

proposed trip; and identifying anticipated subaward/contract amounts, 

the subawardees/contractors, if known at the time of application, and a 

detailed description of the purpose of each subaward/contract. 

Applicants must also include staff, travel and related expenses for the 

required MEP kick-off conference and meetings described in Sections 

II.5. and II.6. of this FFO in the budget tables and budget narratives. A 

suggested budget table and budget narrative template are available on 

the MEP website, http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm.
16

 This budget information submitted by an applicant will be evaluated in 

accordance with the Budget Narrative and Financial Plan evaluation 

sub-criteria (see Section V.1.c.i. and ii. of this FFO).

(7) Letters of Commitment or Support. The letters of commitment or 

support identified below do not count toward the overall application page 

limit. In obtaining letters of commitment, please note that it is 

inappropriate for Federal employees to critique or provide feedback on 

project ideas, etc., and it is also inappropriate for Federal employees to 

provide a letter of support.

a) For non-profit applicants, a resolution from the fiduciary board 

authorizing submission of the MEP Center application to NIST 

and supporting the activities described therein is required.

b) Applicant and Third-Party Non-Federal Cost Sharing: With the 

exception of a commitment letter from the applicant, letters of 

commitment for all other third-party sources of non-Federal cost 

sharing identified in a proposal are not required, but are strongly 

encouraged. Applications without commitment letters for each item of 

third-party, non-federal cost sharing may be considered less favorably 

during the application review process. Applicants may submit a 

summary listing of non-Federal cost share, which will not be counted 

toward the page limit. 

(i) Applicant Non-Federal Cost Sharing (Cash and In-kind): A 

letter of commitment is required from an authorized 

representative of the applicant, stating the total amount of cost 

share to be contributed by the applicant towards the proposed 

MEP Center project separate and apart from the submission of 

the proposal. This stand-alone letter must cover all five (5) 

years of the proposed MEP Center project and include a per 

year break-out of the applicant’s contribution of non-federal cost 

share, as well as a per year break-out of cash cost share 

(including anticipated program income) and in-kind (non-cash) 

contributions. 

 

(ii) Third Party Cost Sharing (Cash and In-kind): The applicant 

is strongly encouraged to include in its application a letter of 

commitment from an authorized representative of each thirdparty organization providing cash or in-kind contributions that 

are to be used as cost share under the proposed MEP Center 

project. Any such letter(s) should clearly state: whether the 

third-party contribution will consist of cash contributions, in-kind 

contributions, or a combination thereof; the total amount of the 

contribution, including a break-out of cash versus in-kind 
17

contributions (as applicable); the time period over which the 

third-party contribution will be made; and any interim 

performance requirements for phased contributions. 

c) Subrecipients: Letters of commitment from subrecipients who are 

key to the technical plan’s success are useful for verifying the 

availability of resources, but are not required. Applications without 

commitment letters from all identified, proposed key subrecipients may 

be considered less favorably during the application review process. 

The applicant should include information regarding any planned cost 

share contribution from a subrecipient in their letter of commitment. If 

an award is issued, the recipient is ultimately the entity that is 

committing to the cost share being obtained from the subrecipient.

If a subrecipient fails to meet the cost share expectations, the award 

recipient is required to meet the shortfall. In addition, applicants 

planning to use subawards are responsible for evaluating the financial 

viability of subrecipients to meet proposed cost share levels.

d) Prospective Key Employees: Letters of commitment to join the 

proposing organization’s team are useful for verifying the availability of 

key employees, who are not yet employed at a proposing organization,

to participate in the project if the project is funded. These letters are 

not required, but they can play an important role in conveying the 

qualifications of key employees, especially for projects involving small 

companies or startups. Applications without commitment letters from 

all prospective key employees may be considered less favorably 

during the application review process.

e) Contractors: Letters of commitment from contractors who are key to 

the technical plan’s success are useful for verifying the availability of 

resources, but are not required. Applications without commitment 

letters from all identified, proposed key contractors may be considered 

less favorably during the application review process. Contractors may 

not contribute cost share towards the project.

f) General Letters of Support: General letters of support are not 

required, but may be useful for illustrating broad-based support for the 

applicant’s proposal.

(8) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement. If indirect costs are included in the 

proposed budget, provide a copy of the approved negotiated agreement if 

this rate was negotiated with a cognizant Federal audit agency. If the rate 

was not established by a cognizant Federal audit agency, provide a 

statement to this effect. If the successful applicant includes indirect costs 

in the budget and has not established an indirect cost rate with a 
18

cognizant Federal audit agency, the applicant will be required to obtain 

such a rate in accordance with the Department of Commerce Financial 

Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions available at: 

http://go.usa.gov/hKbj. This does not count toward the page limit.

Alternatively, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.414(f), applicants that have 

never received a negotiated indirect cost rate may elect to charge indirect 

costs to an MEP award pursuant to a de minimis rate of 10 percent of 

modified total direct costs (MTDC), in which case a negotiated indirect 

cost rate agreement is not required. Applicants proposing a 10 percent de 

minimis rate pursuant to 2 CFR 200.414(f) should note this election as 

part of the budget portion of the application.

(9) Resumes. One-page resumes of no more than five key personnel may 

be included; these do not count toward the page limit. Any information 

beyond one page for each resume and any additional resumes submitted 

will not be considered.

When submitting the application electronically via Grants.gov, items IV.2.a.(1). 

through IV.2.a.(5). above are part of the standard application package in Grants.gov 

and can be completed through the download application process. Items IV.2.a.(6). 

through IV.2.a.(9). must be completed and attached by clicking on “Add 

Attachments” found in item 15 of the SF-424, Application for Federal 

Assistance. This will create a zip file that allows for transmittal of the 

documents electronically via Grants.gov. Applicants should carefully follow 

specific Grants.gov instructions at www.grants.gov to ensure the attachments will be 

accepted by the Grants.gov system. A receipt from Grants.gov does not provide 

details concerning whether all attachments (or how many attachments) 

transferred successfully. Applicants using Grants.gov will receive a series of email messages over a period of up to two business days before learning whether a 

Federal agency’s electronic system has received its application.

The Grants.gov Online Users Guide available at the Grants.gov site 

(http://go.usa.gov/cjaEh) provides vital information on checking the status of 

applications. 

See especially the “Check My Application Status” option, found by clicking 

first on Applicants, and then by clicking on Applicant Actions.

Applicants can track their submission in the Grants.gov system by following 

the procedures at the Grants.gov site (http://go.usa.gov/cjamz). It can take up 

to two business days for an application to move fully through the Grants.gov 

system to NIST.

NIST uses the Tracking Numbers assigned by Grants.gov, and does not issue 

Agency Tracking Numbers.
19

b. Application Format

(1) E-mail submissions. Will not be accepted.

(2) Facsimile submissions (fax). Will not be accepted.

(3) Figures, graphs, images, and pictures. Should be of a size that is easily 

readable or viewable and may be landscape orientation.

(4) Font. Easy to read font (11-point minimum). Smaller type may be used in 

figures and tables but must be clearly legible.

(5) Line spacing. Single.

(6) Margins. One (1) inch top, bottom, left, and right.

(7) Paper copies. Will not be accepted. All submissions must be made via 

www.grants.gov.

(8) Page layout. Portrait orientation only (except figures, graphs, and pictures 

(see Section IV.2.b.(3)).

(9) Page Limit. Forty (40) pages.

Page limit includes: Cover page, Technical Proposal (with the exception of the 

Executive Summary), figures, graphs, tables, images, pictures, and all other 

pages of an application, with the exception of the page limit exclusions listed 

below.

Page limit excludes: Table of Contents; Executive Summary; SF-424, 

Application for Federal Assistance; SF-424A, Budget Information – NonConstruction Programs; SF-424B, Assurances – Non-Construction Programs; 

SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities; CD-511, Certification Regarding 

Lobbying; Table of Contents, budget tables and budget narratives; Letters of 

Commitment and/or Support; Indirect Cost Rate Agreement; and Resumes.

(10) Page numbering. Number pages sequentially.

(11) Paper size. 21.6 centimeters by 27.9 centimeters (8 1⁄2 inches by 11 inches).

(12) Application language. English.

(13) Typed document. All applications, including forms, must be typed.
20

c. Application Replacement Pages. Applicants may not submit replacement pages 

and/or missing documents once an application has been submitted. Any revisions 

must be made by submission of a new application that must be received by NIST by 

the submission deadline.

d. Pre-Applications. NIST is not accepting pre-applications or white papers under this

FFO.

e. Certifications Regarding Federal Felony and Federal Criminal Tax Convictions, 

Unpaid Federal Tax Assessments and Delinquent Federal Tax Returns. In 

accordance with Federal appropriations law, an authorized representative of the 

selected applicant(s) may be required to provide certain pre-award certifications 

regarding federal felony and federal criminal tax convictions, unpaid federal tax 

assessments, and delinquent federal tax returns.

3. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM). Pursuant 

to 2 CFR part 25, applicants and recipients (as the case may be) are required to: (i) 

be registered in SAM before submitting its application; (ii) provide a valid unique 

entity identifier in its application; and (iii) continue to maintain an active SAM 

registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal 

award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency, 

unless otherwise excepted from these requirements pursuant to 2 CFR 25.110. 

NIST will not make a Federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied 

with all applicable unique entity identifier and SAM requirements; if an applicant has 

not fully complied with the requirements by the time that NIST is ready to make a 

Federal award pursuant to this FFO, NIST may determine that the applicant is not 

qualified to receive a Federal award and use that determination as a basis for 

making a Federal award to another applicant. 

4. Submission Dates and Times. Applicants must submit applications electronically 

through www.grants.gov. Electronic applications must be received no later than 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 25, 2016. Applicants should be aware, 

and factor in their application submission planning, that the Grants.gov 

system is expected to be closed for routine maintenance at these times: from 

12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, Saturday, February 20, 2016 until Monday, February 

22, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. Eastern Time; and from 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, 

Saturday, February 20, 2016 until Monday, February 22, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. 

Eastern Time; and from 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time, Saturday, March 19, 2016 

until Monday, March 21, 2016 at 6:00 a.m. Eastern Time. Applications cannot 

be submitted when Grants.gov is closed. The approximate start date for the 

award made under this FFO is expected to be October 1, 2016. 

When developing your submission timeline, please keep in mind that: (1) all 

applicants are required to have a current registration in the System for Award 

Management (SAM.gov); (2) the free annual registration process in the electronic 

System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (see Section IV.3 and Section 
21

IV.7.a.(1).b). of this FFO) may take between three and five business days or as long 

as more than two weeks; (3) applicants are required to have a current registration in 

Grants.gov; and (4) applicants will receive a series of e-mail messages from 

Grants.gov over a period of up to two business days before learning whether a 

Federal agency’s electronic system has received its application. Please note that a 

federal assistance award cannot be issued if the designated recipient’s 

registration in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) is not current at 

the time of the award.

Applicants will find instructions on registering with SAM.gov as part of the 

Grants.gov process at: 

http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration.html

 

The date and time recorded by www.grants.gov will be considered the official time 

that the application was received by NIST. Applicants are cautioned that the 

validation process may take up to two full business days after the application is 

submitted to Grants.gov. 

NIST strongly recommends that applicants do not wait until the last minute to submit 

an application. NIST will not make allowance for any late submissions. The 

responsibility for ensuring a complete application is received by NIST by the 

deadline is the sole responsibility of the applicant. To avoid any potential processing 

backlogs due to last minute Grants.gov registrations, applicants are strongly 

encouraged to start their Grants.gov registration process at least four (4) weeks prior 

to the application due date. 

NIST will not accept applications submitted by mail, facsimile, or by email.

5. Intergovernmental Review. Applications under this Program are not subject to 

Executive Order 12372.

6. Funding Restrictions. Construction activities are not an allowable cost under the 

MEP Program. In addition, a recipient or a subrecipient may not charge profits, fees 

or other increments above cost to an MEP award. Pre-award costs under this FFO 

are subject to the prior written approval of the NIST Grants Officer. 

7. Other Submission Requirements 

a. Applications must be submitted electronically through www.grants.gov. NIST 

will not accept applications submitted by mail, facsimile, or by e-mail.

(1) Electronic applications must be submitted via Grants.gov at www.grants.gov, 

under announcement 2016-NIST-MEP-01. 

a) Submitters of electronic applications should carefully follow specific 

Grants.gov instructions to ensure the attachments will be accepted by the 
22

Grants.gov system. A receipt from Grants.gov indicating an application is 

received does not provide information about whether attachments have 

been received. For further information or questions regarding applying 

electronically for the 2016-NIST-MEP-01 announcement, contact

Christopher Hunton by phone at 301-975-5718 or by e-mail at 

grants@nist.gov.

b) Applicants are strongly encouraged to start early and not wait until the 

approaching due date before logging on and reviewing the instructions for 

submitting an application through Grants.gov. The Grants.gov registration 

process must be completed before a new registrant can apply 

electronically. If all goes well, the registration process takes three (3) to 

five (5) business days. If problems are encountered, the registration 

process can take up to two (2) weeks or more. Applicants must have a 

valid unique entity identifier number and must maintain a current 

registration in the Federal government’s primary registrant database, the 

System for Award Management (https://www.sam.gov/), as explained on 

the Grants.gov Web site. See also Section IV.3. of this FFO. After 

registering, it may take several days or longer from the initial log-on before 

a new Grants.gov system user can submit an application. Only authorized 

individual(s) will be able to submit the application, and the system may 

need time to process a submitted application. Applicants should save and 

print the proof of submission they receive from Grants.gov. If problems 

occur while using Grants.gov, the applicant is advised to (a) print any error 

message received and (b) call Grants.gov directly for immediate 

assistance. If calling from within the United States or from a U.S. territory, 

please call 800-518-4726. If calling from a place other than the United 

States or a U.S. territory, please call 606-545-5035. Assistance from the 

Grants.gov Help Desk will be available around the clock every day, with 

the exception of Federal holidays. Help Desk service will resume at 7:00 

a.m. Eastern Time the day after Federal holidays. For assistance using 

Grants.gov, you may also contact support@grants.gov.

c) To find instructions on submitting an application on Grants.gov, Applicants 

should refer to the “Applicants” tab in the banner just below the top of the 

www.grants.gov home page. Clicking on the “Applicants” tab produces 

two exceptionally useful sources of information, Applicant Actions and 

Applicant Resources, which applicants are advised to review. 

Applicants will receive a series of e-mail messages over a period of up to two 

business days before learning whether a Federal agency’s electronic system has 

received its application. Closely following the detailed information in these 

subcategories will increase the likelihood of acceptance of the application by the 

Federal agency’s electronic system. 
23

Applicants should pay close attention to the guidance under “Applicant FAQs,” as it 

contains information important to successful submission on Grants.gov, including 

essential details on the naming conventions for attachments to Grants.gov 

applications.

All applicants should be aware that adequate time must be factored into applicants’ 

schedules for delivery of their application. Applicants are advised that volume on 

Grants.gov may be extremely heavy as the deadline date approaches.

The application must be both received and validated by Grants.gov. The application is 

“received” when Grants.gov provides the applicant a confirmation of receipt and an 

application tracking number. If an applicant does not see this confirmation and tracking 

number, the application has not been received. After the application has been received, 

it must still be validated. During this process, it may be “validated” or “rejected with 

errors.” To know whether the application was rejected with errors and the reasons why, 

the applicant must log in to Grants.gov, select “Applicants” from the top navigation, and 

select “Track my application” from the drop-down list. If the status is “rejected with 

errors,” the applicant may still seek to correct the errors and resubmit your application 

before the deadline. If the applicant does not correct the errors, the application will not 

be forwarded to NIST by Grants.gov.

Refer to important information in Section IV.4. Submission Dates and Times, to help 

ensure your application is received on time. 

b. Amendments. Any amendments to this FFO will be announced through 

Grants.gov. Applicants may sign up on Grants.gov to receive amendments by email 

or may request copies from Jennifer Leon by telephone at (301) 975-4176 or by email to mepffo@nist.gov. Since this opportunity is also announced in the Federal 

Register, any amendments to that notice will be published in the Federal Register. 

Copies of the Federal Register announcement and any amendments published in 

the Federal Register can be found at https://www.federalregister.gov/ and may also 

be requested from Jennifer Leon by telephone at (301) 975-4176 or by e-mail to 

mepffo@nist.gov. 

V. Application Review Information

1. Evaluation Criteria. The evaluation criteria, selection factors, review and selection 

process provided in this section will be used for this competition in lieu of and to the 

extent they are inconsistent with will supersede those provided in the MEP 

regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, specifically 15 CFR 290.6 and 290.7. The 

evaluation criteria that will be used in evaluating applications and assigned weights, 

with a maximum score of 100, are listed below.

a. Executive Summary and Project Narrative. (40 points; Sub-criteria i through iv 

will be weighted equally) NIST/MEP will evaluate the extent to which the 
24

applicant’s Executive Summary and Project Narrative demonstrates how the 

applicant’s methodology will efficiently and effectively establish an MEP Center and

provide manufacturing extension services to primarily small and medium-sized 

manufacturers in the applicable State-wide geographical service area identified in 

Section II.2. of this FFO. Applicants should name the state to be covered in the first 

sentence of the Executive Summary and Project Narrative. Reviewers will consider 

the following topics when evaluating the Executive Summary and Project Narrative:

i. Center Strategy. Reviewers will assess the applicant’s strategy proposed for 

the Center to deliver services that meet manufacturers’ needs, generate client 

impacts (e.g., cost savings, increased sales, etc.), and support a strong 

manufacturing ecosystem. Reviewers will assess the quality with which the 

applicant: 

• incorporates the market analysis described in the criterion set forth in 

Section V.1.a.ii.(1). below to inform strategies, products and services; 

• defines a strategy for delivering services that balances market 

penetration with impact and revenue generation, addressing the needs 

of manufacturers, with an emphasis on the small and medium-sized 

manufacturers;

• defines the Center’s existing and/or proposed roles and relationships

with other entities in the State’s manufacturing ecosystem, including 

State, regional, and local agencies, economic development 

organizations and educational institutions such as universities and 

community or technical colleges, industry associations, and other 

appropriate entities;

• plans to engage with other entities in Statewide and/or regional 

advanced manufacturing initiatives; and

• supports achievements of the MEP mission and objectives while also 

satisfying the interests of other stakeholders, investors, and partners.

ii. Market Understanding. Reviewers will assess the strategy proposed for the 

Center to define the target market, understand the needs of manufacturers 

(especially Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)), and to define appropriate 

services to meet identified needs. Reviewers will evaluate the proposed 

approach for regularly updating this understanding through the five years. The 

following sub-topics will be evaluated and given equal weight: 

(1) Market Segmentation. Reviewers will assess the quality and extent of 

the applicant’s market segmentation strategy including:

• Segmentation of company size, geography, and industry priorities 

including some consideration of rural, start-up (a manufacturing 

establishment that has been in operation for five years or less) and/or

very small manufacturers as appropriate to the state;

• alignment with state and/or regional initiatives; and

• other important factors identified by the applicant. 
25

(2) Needs Identification and Product/Service Offerings. Reviewers will 

assess the quality and extent of the applicant’s proposed needs identification 

and proposed products and services for both sales growth and operational

improvement in response to the applicant’s market segmentation and 

understanding assessed by reviewers under the preceding Section 

V.1.a.ii.(1). Of particular interest is how the applicant would leverage new 

manufacturing technologies, techniques and processes usable by small and 

medium-sized manufacturers. Reviewers will also consider how an 

applicant’s proposed approach will support a job-driven training agenda with 

manufacturing clients. (To learn more about the White House job-driven 

training agenda, please go to: 

(https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/ready_to_work_factsheet

.pdf). 

iii. Business Model. Reviewers will assess the quality, feasibility and potential 

efficacy and efficiency of the applicant’s proposed business model for the 

Center as provided in the Project Narrative, Qualifications of the Applicant; 

Key Personnel, Organizational Structure and Managment, and the Budget 

Tables and Budget Narratives sections of its Technical Proposal, submitted 

under section IV.2.a.(6) of this FFO, and the proposed business model’s

ability to execute the strategy evaluated under criterion set forth in Section

V.1.a.i., based on the market understanding evaluated under criterion set 

forth in Section V.1.a.ii.. The following sub-topics will be evaluated and given 

equal weight: 

(1) Outreach and Service Delivery to the Market. Reviewers will assess 

the extent to which the proposed Center is organized to:

• identify, reach and provide proposed services to key market segments 

and individual manufacturers described above;

• work with a manufacturer’s leadership in strategic discussions related 

to new technologies, new products and new markets; and 

• leverage the applicant’s past experience in working with small and 

medium-sized manufacturers as a basis for future programmatic 

success. 

(2) Partnership Leverage and Linkages. Reviewers will assess the extent 

to which the proposed Center will make effective use of resources or 

partnerships with third parties such as industry, universities,

community/technical colleges, nonprofit economic development 

organizations, and Federal, State and Local Government Agencies in the 

Center’s business model.

iv. Performance Measurement and Management. Reviewers will assess the 

extent to which the applicant will use a systematic approach to measuring and 

managing performance including the:
26

• quality and extent of the applicant’s stated goals, milestones and 

outcomes described by operating year (year 1, year 2, etc.);

• applicant’s utilization of client-based business results important to 

stakeholders in understanding program impact; and

• depth of the proposed methodology for program management and 

internal evaluation likely to ensure effective operations and oversight 

for meeting program and service delivery objectives.

b. Qualifications of the Applicant; Key Personnel, Organizational Structure and 

Management; and Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance

(30 points; Sub-criteria i and ii will be weighted equally). Reviewers will assess 

the ability of the key personnel, the applicant’s management structure and Oversight 

Board or Advisory Committee and Governance to deliver the program and services 

envisioned for the Center. Reviewers will consider the following topics when 

evaluating the qualifications of the applicant and of program management:

i. Key Personnel, Organizational Structure and Management. Reviewers 

will assess the extent to which the:

• proposed key personnel have the appropriate experience and education in 

manufacturing, outreach, program management and partnership 

development to support achievements of the MEP mission and objectives;

• proposed management structure and organizational roles are aligned to 

plan, direct, monitor, organize and control the monetary resources of the 

proposed center to achieve its business objectives (Refer to Section I.4. of 

this FFO);

• proposed organizational structure flows logically from the specified 

approach to the market and products and service offerings; and

• proposed field staff structure sufficiently supports the geographic 

concentrations and industry targets for the region.

ii. Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance. Reviewers 

will assess the extent to which the: 

• proposed Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and its operations are 

complete, appropriate and will meet the program’s objectives at the time of 

award, or, if such a Board or Committee does not exist at the time of 

application or is not expected to meet these requirements at the time of 

award, the extent to which the proposed plan for developing and 

implementing such an Oversight Board or Advisory Committee within 90 

days of award start date (expected to be October 1, 2016) is feasible. 

(Refer to Section I.3. of this FFO).

• Oversight Board or Advisory Committee and Governance is engaged with

overseeing and guiding the Center and supports its own development 

through a schedule of regular meetings, and processes ensuring 
27

Oversight Board or Advisory Committee involvement in strategic planning, 

recruitment, selection and retention of board members, board assessment 

practices and board development initiatives (Refer to Section I.3. of this 

FFO).

c. Budget and Financial Plan. (30 points; Sub-criteria i and ii will be weighted 

equally). Reviewers will assess the suitability and focus of the applicant’s five (5) 

year budget. The application will be assessed in the following areas:

i. Budget. Reviewers will assess the extent to which:

• the proposed financial plan is aligned to support the execution of the 

proposed Center’s strategy and business model over the five (5) year 

project plan;

• the proposed projections for income and expenditures are appropriate for 

the scale of services that are to be delivered by the proposed Center and 

the service delivery model envisioned within the context of the overall 

financial model over the five (5) year project plan;

• a reasonable ramp-up or scale-up scope and budget has the Center fully 

operational by the 4th year of the project; and

• the proposal’s narrative for each of the budgeted items explains the 

rationale for each of the budgeted items, including assumptions the 

applicant used in budgeting for the Center.

ii. Quality of the Financial Plan for Meeting the Award’s Non-Federal Cost 

Share Requirements over 5 Years. Reviewers will assess the quality of 

and extent to which the:

• applicant clearly describes the total level of cost share and detailed 

rationale of the cost share, including cash and in-kind, in their proposed 

budget.

• applicant’s funding commitments for cost share are documented by letters 

of support from the applicant, proposed sub-recipients and any other 

partners identified and meet the basic matching requirements of the 

program;

• applicant’s cost share meets basic requirements of allowability, allocability 

and reasonableness under applicable federal costs principles set for in 2 

CFR 200, Subpart E; 

• applicant’s underlying accounting system is established or will be 

established to meet applicable federal costs principles set for in 2 CFR

200, Subpart E; and

• the overall proposed financial plan is sufficiently robust and diversified so 

as to support the long term sustainability of the Center throughout the five 

(5) years of the project plan.

2. Review and Selection Process
28

Proposals, reports, documents and other information related to applications submitted 

to NIST and/or relating to financial assistance awards issued by NIST will be reviewed 

and considered by Federal employees, Federal agents and contractors, and/or by nonFederal personnel who enter into nondisclosure agreements covering such information.

a. Initial Administrative Review of Applications. An initial review of timely received 

applications will be conducted to determine eligibility, completeness, and 

responsiveness to this FFO and the scope of the stated program objectives. 

Applications determined to be ineligible, incomplete, and/or non-responsive may be 

eliminated from further review. However, NIST, in its sole discretion, may continue 

the review process for an application that is missing non-substantive information that 

can easily be rectified or cured. 

b. Full Review of Eligible, Complete, and Responsive Applications. Applications

that are determined to be eligible, complete, and responsive will proceed for full 

reviews in accordance with the review and selection processes below. Eligible, 

complete and responsive applications will be grouped by the State in which the 

proposed MEP Center is to be established. The applications in each group will be 

reviewed by the same reviewers and will be evaluated, reviewed, and selected as 

described below in separate groups.

(1) Evaluation and Review. Each application will be reviewed by at least three 

technically qualified individual reviewers who will evaluate each application 

based on the evaluation criteria (see Section V.1. of this FFO). Applicants may 

receive written follow-up questions in order for the reviewers to gain a better 

understanding of the applicant’s proposal. Each reviewer will provide a written 

technical assessment against the evaluation criteria and based on that 

assessment will assign each application a numeric score, with a maximum score 

of 100. If a non-Federal reviewer is used, the reviewers may discuss the 

applications with each other, but scores will be determined on an individual basis, 

not as a consensus. 

Applicants whose applications receive an average score of 70 or higher out of 

100 will be deemed finalists. If deemed necessary, finalists will be invited to 

participate with reviewers in a conference call, and/or a video conference and/or 

finalists will be invited to participate in a site visit that will be conducted by the 

same reviewers at the applicant’s location. In any event, if there are two (2) or 

more finalists within a state, conference calls, video conferences or site visits will 

be conducted with each finalist. Finalists will be reviewed and evaluated, and 

reviewers may revise their assigned numeric scores based on the evaluation 

criteria (see Section V.1. of this FFO) as a result of the conference call, video 

conference and/or site visit.

 
29

(2) Ranking and Selection. Based upon an average of the technical reviewers’ 

final scores, an adjectival rating will be assigned to each application in 

accordance with the following scale: 

Fundable, Outstanding (91-100 points); 

Fundable, Very Good (81-90 points); 

Fundable (70-80 points); or 

Unfundable (0-69 points).

For decision-making purposes, applications receiving the same adjectival rating 

will be considered to have an equivalent ranking, although their technical review 

scores, while comparable, may not necessarily be the same.

The Selecting Official is the NIST Associate Director for Innovation and Industry 

Services or designee. The Selecting Official makes the final recommendation to 

the NIST Grants Officer regarding the funding of applications under this FFO. 

The Selecting Official shall be provided all applications, all the scores and

technical assessments of the reviewers, and all information obtained from the

applicants during the evaluation, review and negotiation processes.

The Selecting Official will generally select and recommend the most meritorious

application for an award based on the adjectival rankings and/or one or more of 

the six (6) selection factors described in Section V.3. of this FFO. The Selecting 

Official retains the discretion to select and recommend an application out of rank 

order (i.e., from a lower adjectival category) based on one or more of the 

selection factors, or to select and recommend no applications for funding. The

Selecting Official’s recommendation to the Grants Officer shall set forth the

bases for the selection decision.

As part of the overall review and selection process, NIST reserves the right to 

request that applicants provide pre-award clarifications and/or to enter into preaward negotiations relative to programmatic, financial or other aspects of an 

application, such as but not limited to the revision or removal of proposed budget 

costs, or the modification of proposed MEP Center activities, work plans or 

program goals and objectives. In this regard, NIST may request that applicants

provide supplemental information required by the Agency prior to award. NIST 

also reserves the right to reject an application where information is uncovered 

that raises a reasonable doubt as to the responsibility of the applicant. The final 

approval of selected applications and issuance of awards will be by the NIST 

Grants Officer. The award decisions of the NIST Grants Officer are final.

c. Federal Awarding Agency Review of Risk Posed by Applicants. After 

applications are proposed for funding by the Selecting Official, the NIST Grants 

Management Division (GMD) performs pre-award risk assessments in accordance 

with 2 CFR 200.205, which may include a review of the financial stability of an 

applicant, the quality of the applicant’s management systems, the history of 
30

performance, and/or the applicant’s ability to effectively implement statutory, 

regulatory, or other requirements imposed on non-Federal entities. In addition, prior 

to making an award where the total Federal share is expected to exceed the 

simplified acquisition threshold (currently $150,000), NIST GMD will review and 

consider the publicly available information about that applicant in the Federal 

Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). An applicant 

may, at its option, review and comment on information about itself previously 

entered into FAPIIS by a Federal awarding agency. As part of its review of risk 

posed by applicants, NIST GMD will consider any comments made by the applicant 

in FAPIIS in making its determination about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, 

and record of performance under Federal awards. Upon completion of the preaward risk assessment, the Grants Officer will make a responsibility determination 

concerning whether the applicant is qualified to receive the subject award and, if so, 

whether appropriate special conditions that correspond to the degree of risk posed

by the applicant should be applied to an award. 

3. Selection Factors. The Selection Factors for this FFO are as follows:

a. The availability of Federal funds;

b. Relevance of the proposed project to MEP program goals and policy objectives;

c. Reviewers' evaluations, including technical comments;

d. The need to assure appropriate distribution of MEP services within the 

designated State; 

e. Whether the project duplicates other projects funded by DoC or by other Federal 

agencies; and

f. Whether the application complements or supports other Administration priorities,

or projects supported by DoC or other Federal agencies, such as but not limited 

to the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation and the Investing in 

Manufacturing Communities Partnership.

4. Anticipated Announcement and Award Date. Review, selection, and award 

processing is expected to be completed in mid-late 2016. The anticipated start date 

for awards made under this FFO is expected to be October 1, 2016.

5. Additional Information

a. Notification to Unsuccessful Applicants. Unsuccessful applicants will be notified 

in writing.

b. Retention of Unsuccessful Applications. An electronic copy of each non-selected 

application will be retained for three (3) years for record keeping purposes. After 
31

three (3) years, it will be destroyed.

VI. Federal Award Administration Information

1. Federal Award Notices. Successful applicants will receive an award package from 

the NIST Grants Officer. The award cover page, i.e., CD-450, Financial Assistance 

Award is the authorizing document available at 

http://ocio.os.doc.gov/s/groups/public/@doc/@os/@ocio/@oitpp/documents/content/

dev01_002513.pdf.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

a. Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit 

Requirements. Through 2. CFR 1327.101, the Department of Commerce 

adopted the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit 

Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 CFR Part 200, which apply to awards 

made pursuant to this FFO. Refer to http://go.usa.gov/SBYh and 

http://go.usa.gov/SBg4. 

b. Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and 

Conditions. The Department of Commerce will apply the Financial Assistance 

Standard Terms and Conditions dated December 26, 2014 to this award. If the 

Department of Commerce publishes revised Standard Terms and Conditions 

prior to issuance of awards under this FFO, the revised Standard Terms and 

Conditions will apply. Refer to Section VII. of this FFO, Federal Awarding 

Agency Contacts, Grant Rules and Regulations, if you need more information. 

c. Department of Commerce Pre-Award Notification Requirements. The 

Department of Commerce will apply the Pre-Award Notification Requirements for 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements dated December 30, 2014 (79 FR 78390). 

If the Department of Commerce publishes revised Pre-Award Notification 

Requirements prior to issuance of awards under this FFO, the revised Pre-Award 

Notification Requirements will apply. Refer to Section VII. of this FFO, Federal 

Awarding Agency Contacts, Grant Rules and Regulations for more information.

d. Funding Availability and Limitation of Liability. Funding Availability and 

Limitation of Liability. NIST issues this notice subject to the appropriations 

made available under Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-

113, Div. B., Title I (Dec. 18, 2015). In no event will NIST or the Department of 

Commerce be responsible for proposal preparation costs if these programs fail to 

receive funding or are cancelled because of agency priorities. Publication of this 

announcement does not oblige NIST or the Department of Commerce to award 

any specific project or to obligate any available funds.

e. Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership General Terms and 

Conditions. As a recipient of a NIST/MEP award, the recipient shall comply with 
32

the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership General Terms and Conditions 

(MEP Terms and Conditions), as may be periodically amended. The MEP 

General Terms and Conditions in effect at the time the awards are made will be 

incorporated into the awards. A copy of the current MEP General Terms and 

Conditions is available at: http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm. 

Award recipients will also be required to comply with any Special Award 

Conditions imposed by the NIST/MEP Grants Officer.

f. Operating Plan, Budget and Supporting Documentation. Following the 

issuance of an MEP award, recipients will be required to submit an Operating 

Plan in accordance with the MEP Operating Plan Guidelines in effect at the time 

the award is made. In this connection, NIST may require recipients to provide 

copies of sub-tier agreements, including subawards and contracts over 

$150,000, as well subrecipient performance monitoring plans. A copy of the 

current MEP Operating Plan Guidelines is available at: http://nist.gov/mep/ffostate-competitions-03.cfm.

3. Reporting 

a. Reporting Requirements. The following reporting requirements described in 

Sections A.01 Performance (Technical) Reports and B.02 Financial Reports of the 

Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions 

dated December 26, 2014, http://go.usa.gov/hKbj, apply to awards in this program:

(1) Financial Reports. The Recipient shall submit an SF-425, Federal Financial 

Report, into the MEP’s Enterprise Information System (MEIS) on a semi-annual 

basis after the sixth and twelfth month of each operating year, unless other 

reporting intervals and/or due dates are identified by the NIST Grants Officer

pursuant to a Special Award Condition. Reports will be due within 30 days after 

the end of each semi-annual reporting period. The Recipient shall submit a final 

SF-425 within 90 days after the expiration date of the award.

(2) Performance (Technical) Reports. The Recipient shall submit a Technical 

Report (completing all required MEIS fields) on a semi-annual basis after the 

sixth and twelfth month of each operating year, unless other reporting intervals 

and/or due dates are identified by the NIST Grants Officer pursuant to a Special 

Award Condition. Reports are due in MEIS no later than 30 days following the 

end of each reporting period. The Recipient shall submit a final 

Technical/Quarterly report within 90 days after the expiration date of the award.

Technical/Quarterly Report details are accessible on the MEIS website 

(https://meis.nist.gov/). Technical progress reports shall contain information as 

prescribed in the NIST MEP Reporting Guidelines (OMB Control Number 0693-

0032). For further information regarding the NIST MEP Reporting Process, you 

may download a copy of the NIST MEP Reporting Guidelines at 

http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm.
33

(3) Post Client Project Follow-Up. The recipient will be required to provide client 

and project data on a quarterly basis (unless otherwise directed by the NIST 

Grants Officer) and in a specified format to the organization identified by 

NIST/MEP in order for post-project follow-up data to be obtained (OMB Control 

Number 0693-0021). For further information regarding the NIST MEP Reporting 

process, you may download a copy of the NIST MEP Reporting Guidelines at 

http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm.

(4) Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters. In accordance with section 872 

of Public Law 110-417 (as amended; see 41 U.S.C. 2313), if the total value of a 

recipient’s currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement 

contracts from all Federal awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 for any 

period of time during the period of performance of an award made under this 

FFO, then the recipient shall be subject to the requirements specified in 

Appendix XII to 2 CFR Part 200 (http://go.usa.gov/cTBwC), for maintaining the 

currency of information reported to SAM that is made available in FAPIIS about 

certain civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings involving the recipient.

b. Audit Requirements. 2 CFR 200 Subpart F, adopted by the Department of 

Commerce through 2 CFR 1327.101 requires any non-Federal entity (i.e., including 

non-profit institutions of higher education and other non-profit organizations) that 

expends Federal awards of $750,000 or more in the recipient’s fiscal year to conduct 

a single or program-specific audit in accordance with the requirements set out in the 

Subpart. Applicants are reminded that NIST, the Department of Commerce Office of 

Inspector General, or another authorized Federal agency may conduct an audit of an 

award at any time. 

b. Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. In accordance 

with 2 CFR Part 170, all recipients of a Federal award made on or after October 1, 

2010, are required to comply with reporting requirements under the Federal Funding 

Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. No. 109-282). In general, all 

recipients are responsible for reporting sub-awards of $25,000 or more. In addition, 

recipients that meet certain criteria are responsible for reporting executive 

compensation. Applicants must ensure they have the necessary processes and 

systems in place to comply with the reporting requirements should they receive 

funding. Also see the Federal Register notice published September 14, 2010, at 75 

FR 55663 available here http://go.usa.gov/hKnQ.

d. Performance Reviews. NIST will perform program evaluations of the recipient as 

follows: (1) in an annual review, as required by 15 CFR § 290.8, and (2) an 

independent peer review during the third year of operation and at least every two 

years thereafter, as required by 15 U.S.C. 278k(c)(5) and 15 CFR 290.8.

VII. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)
34

Questions should be directed to the following contact persons:

Subject Area Point of Contact

Administrative, budget, cost-sharing, 

eligibility questions and other 

programmatic questions.

Diane Henderson

Phone: (301) 975-5105

Fax: (301) 963-6556

E-mail: mepffo@nist.gov

Technical Assistance with Grants.gov 

Submissions

Christopher Hunton

Phone: (301) 975-5718

Fax: (301) 975-8884

E-mail: grants@nist.gov

Grant Rules and Regulations Michael Teske

Phone: (301) 975-6358

Fax: (301) 975-6368

E-mail: michael.teske@nist.gov

VIII. Other Information

1. Webinar Information Session: NIST/MEP will hold one or more webinar

information sessions for organizations that are considering applying to this 

opportunity. These webinars will provide general information regarding MEP and 

offer general guidance on preparing proposals. NIST/MEP staff will be available on 

the webinars to answer general questions. During the webinars, proprietary 

technical discussions about specific project ideas will not be permitted. Also, 

NIST/MEP staff will not critique or provide feedback on any specific project ideas 

during the webinars or at any time before submission of a proposal to MEP. 

However, NIST/MEP staff will provide information about the MEP eligibility and costsharing requirements, evaluation criteria and selection factors, selection process, 

and the general characteristics of a competitive MEP proposal during this webinar, 

and by phone and email. The webinars will be held approximately fifteen (15) to 

thirty (30) business days after posting of this FFO. The exact dates and times of the 

webinars will be posted on the MEP website at http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-statecompetitions-03.cfm. The webinars will be recorded and a link to the recordings will 

be posted on the MEP website. In addition, the webinar presentations will be 

available webinars on the MEP website. Organizations wishing to participate in one 

or more webinars must sign up by emailing mepffo@nist.gov. Participation in the 

webinars is not required in order for an organization to submit an application 

pursuant to this FFO.
35

2. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). Questions from applicants pertaining to 

MEP eligibility, cost-sharing requirements, evaluation criteria and selection factors, 

selection process, and the general characteristics of a competitive MEP proposal will 

not be considered on an informal basis. Applicants must submit all such questions 

in writing to mepffo@nist.gov. Questions submitted to NIST/MEP may be posted as 

part of an FAQ document, which will be periodically updated on the MEP website at 

http://nist.gov/mep/ffo-state-competitions-03.cfm.