Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
FY2020 Innovation and Impact Network Grants (Tier 2) – Achieving Optimal Health and Preventing Teen Pregnancy in Key Priority Areas (AH-TP2-20-002)
*Note that FAQs will be updated to include additional questions on a weekly basis.
When are applications due for Opportunity Number: AH-TP2-20-002?
The FOA was amended on March 24, 2020, to push the due date back by two weeks. Applications are now due on Friday, May 1, 2020.
I saw that the FOA was amended on March 24, 2020. What changes were made to it?
Three changes were made. First, the due date was pushed back from Friday, April 17 to Friday, May 1, 2020. Second, the first page of the FOA includes the date amendments were made. Third, page 50 now indicates that applications should include signed MOUs when possible.
Can the same organization submit separate applications to all three fiscal year (FY) 2020 funding opportunity announcements (FOAs)?
Yes, an organization can submit an application to more than one FOA. Each FOA is different and organizations should check the eligibility and expectations of each individual FOA to determine whether or not to apply. HHS/OASH/OGM will deem each application submitted by an entity eligible according to the eligibility information included in the specific FOA.
Can an individual submit a grant application?
Grants are awarded to organizations rather than individuals. An application may be submitted by an individual authorized to act/sign for an organization and to assume the obligations imposed by the legislation and any additional conditions of the grant. However, the award will not go directly to an individual but to the organization which the individual represents.
Will the Office of Population Affairs (OPA) select at least one Network awardee for each Priority Area?
This depends on the number of applicants in the priority area and scoring by independent reviewers.
The reviewers will comment on and score the applications, focusing their comments and scoring decisions on the identified criteria. In addition to the independent review panel, Federal staff will review each application for programmatic, budgetary, and grants management compliance. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs will provide recommendations for funding to the Grants Management Officer to conduct risk analysis. In providing these recommendations, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs will take into consideration the following additional factor(s): distribution of awardees across the priority areas as well as geographic distribution of award recipients across the states and territories. (FOA, pp. 61-62)
How can I get help registering for Grants.gov?
Does the funding announcement require a letter of intent?
No, the funding announcement does not require a Letter of Intent.
Will special consideration be given to organizations that have previously received TPP funding?
No. Eligible applicants for this funding include any public or private entity, including faith-based, community-based, and Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations. (FOA, p. 20)
Can an organization submit more than one application to the same FOA?
If an applicant submits more than one application with the same content (for example, you submit your application and then make an update and submit the updated application at a later time), we will only review the last application received by the deadline. If an individual organization submits more than one application for different projects (for example, different content, different programs, different communities), all submitted applications will be reviewed if the project described is unique.
What is the anticipated number of awards?
OPA anticipates 9-15 awards. (FOA, pg. 28)
Can you please confirm what the correct RFA number will be? Is there an expected date for the grants.gov website repairs to be made?
IMPORTANT: Yes, the Funding Opportunity number has changed from PA-TP2-20-002 to AH-TP2-20-002. As of February 24, 2020, we updated the grants.gov website and changed the prefix of the announcement number to allow for proper application submission. If applying for the TPP20 Tier 2, Innovation and Impact Network Grants: Achieving Optimal Health and Preventing Teen Pregnancy in Key Priority Areas FOA, you should apply using the currently posted FOA Opportunity No. AH-TP2-20-002 when applying. You must first register an account with Grants.gov before applying for a funding opportunity announcement. We highly encourage you to subscribe to Grants.gov communication for alerts when creating your profile. Doing so, will alert you about important message updates or system changes.
Will the government consider applications submitted by a consortium (i.e., several organization submitting the application as one entity) plus their network of partners?
We will only consider for review the submission of an application by an individual organization listed as an “Eligible Applicant” type organization as specified in the FOA on page 28. Several organizations may collectively work on the application together, however only one single application can be submitted by the single applicant and it must meet the applicant submission requirements as specified within the FOA.
Is this funding a continuation of a previous program, or is this new funding?
The Tier 2 Innovation and Impact Network Grants: Achieving Optimal Health and Preventing Teen Pregnancy FOA is a “new” funding opportunity announcement and not associated with a continuation award. A new application must be submitted for consideration under this funding opportunity announcement.
Do we need to include our institution’s name on the project narrative page footer?
No requirement exists and we highly encourage you to not place a footer on the project narrative page. As specified within the FOA, this document must be uploaded as a single attachment under the Project Narrative section under the application. Also, please do not number pages or include a table of contents. Our grants management system will generate page numbers once your application is complete. After completion of upload, we suggest you download and view a copy of the application prior to submission.
Where should we place the plan for oversight of federal award funds? In the 50 pages max of application narrative, in the budget narrative, or in the 50 pages max of appendices?
Your written “plan for oversight of federal award funds,” should be uploaded and included with the submission of the Budget Narrative portion of the application. This submitted information will not count towards your overall page count.
Can you direct us to where we can access the recordings of the OPA FOA webinars and the related concept webinars (youth engagement, human-centered design, systems thinking)?
All of the listed webinars – including recordings, slides, and transcriptions – are posted to the FOA page of the OPA website (https://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/grant-programs/funding-opportunities/index.html)
Will the reviewers use the order of the scoring criteria to score the applications?
Reviewers assess qualified applications against the established scoring criteria, beginning on page 59: Priority Area (worth 25 of 100 points), Technical Approach (25 points), Innovation and Impact (20 points), project management, capacity, and collaboration (20 points), and work plan and budget (10 points).
My organization is working on a submission for the opportunity referenced in the subject line of this message. After several attempts to locate the application package related to that opportunity, we have been unable to find those materials. Where can I find them?
Obtain an application package electronically by accessing Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/. Find it by searching the CFDA number on page 2 of the FOA, CFDA # is 93.297.
We want to ask if you have specific expectations for applicants to explicitly mention in the narrative how we plan to work around potential COVID-19 response efforts in the planning phase of the proposed work.
There is no such expectation contained within the FOA.
Can the required appendix the Visual Depiction of the Three-Year Innovation and Impact Strategy be presented on 2 pages? We feel like there are different aspects of the strategy that would be important for reviewers to see visually and would be difficult to present in one page.
The FOA contains no reference to page restrictions for the visual depiction. Given the diversity of projects, it is likely they will differ. However, please keep in the mind that your total application, including the Project Narrative plus Appendices, must not exceed 100 pages (FOA, p.30).
Section 8 Application Content, part a. Project Narrative Content starting on page 32 gives guidance for the listed narrative components. This guidance does not always align with the review criteria for each component listed under Section F. 1. Criteria starting on page 58. What will review panel members be using to score applications both the guidance and the criteria or only the criteria? Related to question 2 above, Section 8 part a. Project Narrative Content and Section F. 1. Criteria list the project narrative components in a different order, should we follow the order listed in the review criteria?
Panel reviewers will be expected to have read the full FOA. Per the FOA, successful applications contain all of the information addressed within section e.8 (application content). That content will be scored by panel reviewers against the scoring criteria in section f.
Do you expect that this grant will be offered next fiscal year? I am getting push back from my university due to the timeline.
No. Opportunity Number: AH-TP2-20-002 is a 3-year cooperative agreement, so next fiscal year will not be open to “new” applicants. Instead, it will be a non-competing continuation application year for existing awardees.
Since the due date was pushed back until May 1, has the start date of the award also changed?
No. The award will still start on July 15, 2020.
Can I pick more than one priority area for my application?
No. Applicants must select one priority area, as descripted on page 3 of the FOA. The responsiveness criteria for this FOA is that the applicant has selected a single priority area for their application. If the application does not meet the responsiveness criteria, we will disqualify it from the competition; we will not review it beyond the initial screening. (FOA, p. 29)
What if there is some overlap in priority areas for the focus of my project? For example, while we are focusing on Juvenile Justice, we may also be addressing preventative measures that impact foster youth, who are also at increased risk of involvement in juvenile justice, as well. Is that allowable?
Grantees are expected to select a single priority area as described in Section B.1a-g of the FOA. After selecting a Priority Area, grantees are expected to clearly define their focus within the Priority Area, as described on page 15 of the FOA. Overlap in populations, network entities, and systems is possible, based on how the applicant defined its focus.
Do we need to have interventions at all three stages (1) explore and develop; (2) testing, refining, and evaluating; and (3) dissemination) in our application?
Applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages (exploration and development; testing, refining, and evaluation; and dissemination) throughout the three years. (FOA, p. 21)
Awardees are expected to design, test, refine and evaluate multiple innovative interventions. What qualifies as “innovative”? Can some interventions being implemented and tested by the Network be pre-developed?
Innovation is described as novel or reimagined approaches, relationships, processes, products, programs, or services that lead to substantial improvements in addressing barriers to reducing teen pregnancy and STD transmission (FOA, pg. 80). Applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages (exploration and development; testing, refining, and evaluation; and dissemination) throughout the three years. (FOA, p. 21)
What is the difference between “exploring and developing” and “testing, refining, and evaluation” stages of the project?
Applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages (exploration and development; testing, refining, and evaluation; and dissemination) throughout the three years. Grantees are expected to explore and develop innovative interventions appropriate for the priority area based on needs. For the purposes of this FOA, “explore and develop” and “test, refine, and evaluate” are two distinct categories; however, it is expected that interventions will move between the two categories throughout the course of the project (FOA, pp. 21-22).
Can I focus my project on only disseminating what’s already effective in the priority area?
Applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages (exploration and development; testing, refining, and evaluation; and dissemination) throughout the three years. (FOA, p. 21)
Why are we expected to use a systems thinking approach?
Applicants are expected to use a systems thinking approach to help understand and navigate the big picture of the priority area, teen pregnancy, and optimal health. Systems thinking shows how different factors such as the people, environments, laws, norms, and organizational behavior all interact to affect each other and the issues at play. System thinkers focus on identifying harmful or beneficial patterns of behavior and tweak these interactions so that the system changes itself and produces better outcomes over time. (FOA, p.15)
Does OPA have a preferred model or theory that we should use to guide out innovation and impact strategy?
No. The strategy applicants select to guide their innovation and impact network can include multiple models, frameworks, or theories, and should be relevant to the priority area and reassessed annually throughout the grant. (FOA, p.19)
Can the partners included in my project all be from my organization?
Partners should not be limited to members of an applicant’s pre-existing network; rather, the applicant is expected to use an efficient and objective process to establish partnerships that are most appropriate for the project. (FOA, p.20)
We have a network of partners we have worked with in the past. Do we have to expand that network for this FOA or can we work with our existing network partners?
Partners should not be limited to members of an applicant’s pre-existing network; rather, the applicant is expected to use an efficient and objective process to establish partnerships that are most appropriate for the project. Applicants should start and apply with established partners, but also explain how they will discover, attract, add, and retain new partners throughout the three years. (FOA, p.20)
Can I tap into a pre-existing network/collaborative for my Innovation Network?
Yes. However, partners should not be limited to members of an applicant’s pre-existing network; rather, the applicant is expected to use an efficient and objective process to establish partnerships that are most appropriate for the project. (FOA, p.20)
As the organization applying for the grant, can our organization participate in developing new interventions as a part of the innovation network?
Yes. While the applicant organization can explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate, and disseminate interventions, it is expected to engage and support multiple partners to also explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate, and disseminate interventions. (FOA, p. 20)
What is optimal health?
Optimal health is a dynamic balance of physical, emotional, social, spiritual, and intellectual health. Lifestyle change can be facilitated through a combination of learning experiences that enhance awareness, increase motivation, and build skills and, most important, through the creation of opportunities that open access to environments that make positive health practices the easiest choice. (FOA, p. 80)
What are the required performance measures? Are they approved for collection?
Recipients must collect all performance measures and report to OPA on a semi-annual basis. Final performance measures will be provided to recipients during the first six months of funding and will include measures on reach, dosage, implementation of effective programs according to fidelity, quality and components/elements, sustainability, partnerships, trainings, and dissemination. (FOA, p. 73)
Do we need Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for our grant project?
The applicant is expected to navigate the IRB process, and receive IRB approval, when needed (FOA, p. 23). It is unlikely that all activities conducted under the Network will require IRB approval. For more information on regulations for the protection of human subjects in research please visit https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy.
If any organization wishes to propose a project for two different priority areas, will they need to submit two completely separate applications? Or can they indicate this explicitly in the narrative and supporting documents under one submission?
The organization will need to submit two completely separate applications. The federal government will review your application to determine whether it meets the responsiveness criteria on pg. 29 of the FOA. The responsiveness criteria establishes that the grantee has selected a single priority area (Section B.1.a-g). If your application does not meet the criteria, we will disqualify it from the competition and not review it beyond the initial screening.
Can you talk a little about what are the requirements around defining a service area? How expansive should the network be? Can it be county-based? Can you elaborate on geographic scope?
The FOA does not establish requirements for defining a service area. The FOA states: “The partners within the network may or may not be geographically determined; rather, they should be determined based on the scope and needs of the selected priority area (FOA, p.20).” Therefore, it is possible for Innovation Networks to be selected that are either geographically bound or exist across the United States without being tied to one geographically-defined community. In its application, the applicant is expected to define the focus and scope within a single priority area (FOA, p.15).
How many programs/interventions are expected to be included in the grant application?
The FOA does not specify how many programs or interventions applicants are expected to include in their application, or how many interventions awardees are expected to explore, test, and disseminate throughout the project period. Instead, applicants are expected to make the case for how their project will include multiple interventions and make a measurable impact on the priority area (FOA, p.15). Applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages throughout the three years (FOA, p.21). It is possible that awardees will drop, discover, or add interventions throughout the project period (FOA, p.13).
Regarding caregivers, does this include parents/caregivers of adolescents who are not members of the other categories, e.g., adolescents involved with the juvenile justice system?
The applicant defines their own focus and scope within the identified priority area and should justify why they selected the priority area and how they have defined the scope (FOA, p.33). Applicant may select which caregivers to focus on, which partners and stakeholders to include (FOA, p.20), and which types of interventions to explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate and disseminate.
Does each partner have to do all of the tasks (explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate and disseminate) or can those tasks be split up between partners in the network?
No, the project structure and partner roles will be different for each awardee. The primary awardee and all other partners may have varying responsibilities for the project. While the applicant organization can explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate, and disseminate interventions, it is expected to engage and support multiple partners to also explore, develop, test, refine, evaluate, and disseminate interventions (FOA, p.20). Partners receiving sub-awards may be involved in any or all activities to support the network and ensure it meets all 10 of the grant expectations (e.g., coordination, training, communication, evaluation, intervention development, testing, or dissemination, etc.) (FOA, p.20-21). However, not all partners in the network need to receive a sub-award from the applicant organization to support the project; in fact, having partners with in-kind, separate, or supplemental funding sources can help boost the sustainability of the network (FOA, p.21).
Can one priority area, such as youth engagement, be used to support the primary priority area, such as youth in foster care?
Youth engagement is an expectation for all awardees regardless of the priority area (Expectation G: Engage Participants and Stakeholders) (FOA, p.23).
Additionally, there is one priority area dedicated to learning more about Youth Engagement (FOA, p.10, 12, 18).
All applicants are expected to select one priority area and define the project’s focus within that priority area. Applicants are expected to make a measureable impact on that priority area and justify why they have selected the priority area using available data (FOA, p.15).
Can you clarify what is the difference between “Network Partners” and “Partners”?
The FOA does not provide a distinction, and instead allows the applicant flexibility for determining their partners and collaboration structure.
The application should clearly explain how the applicant and its partners will use best practices for developing a collaborative, impactful network such as building trust, convening the right people, coordinating actions, collaborating generously, and clarifying the purpose of the network (FOA, p.20). Partners should not be limited to members of an applicant’s pre-existing network; rather, the applicant is expected to use an efficient and objective process to establish partnerships that are most appropriate for the project (FOA, p.20). Partners receiving sub-awards may be involved in any activity to support the network (e.g., coordination, training, communication, evaluation, intervention development, testing, or dissemination, etc.). The applicant should determine the best partnership structure for the purposes of the project and one that ensures equity (FOA, p.20-21).
Do interventions have to move through all stages? Meaning, once an intervention is developed, it then needs to be refine and tested or can an intervention just go through one of the stages?
The FOA does not specify whether interventions need to go through all stages during the 3-year project period, which stage interventions should start in, or whether interventions need to progress linearly (i.e., from exploring/developing to testing/evaluating to disseminating), other than to say that awardees are expected to disseminate those interventions deemed effective. Additionally, applicants are not expected to have interventions in all stages at the beginning of their grant but will be expected to have interventions in all stages (exploration and development; testing, refining, and evaluation; and dissemination) during the three years (FOA, p.21).
What type of data is acceptable to use to justify the selection of a priority area?
The FOA does not specify. Please incorporate data that support your application and make sure to properly cite all information.
For the Priority Area “Access to and Experience with Sexual Health”, can interventions target non-youth (e.g., youth providers)?
Yes. Applicants are expected to use a systems thinking approach to help understand and navigate the big picture of the priority area and the outcomes of interest (FOA, p.15). A systems thinking approach accounts for how the multiple factors such as people, environments, laws, norms and organizational behavior all interact to affect each other as well as teen pregnancy. Within their application, applicants should make the case for why their particular approach with multiple interventions will make a measurable impact on their identified priority area while employing a systems approach (FOA, p.15).
I have an inquiry as to what the upper age limit is that OPA accepts for proposals? We are looking to focus on adolescents with autism spectrum disorder and/or mild ID. Developmentally, these young people may hit sexuality milestones a little later than neurotypical adolescents. For a previous study we had with this population as the focus, we identified research that supported focusing TPP efforts up to age 24, So was curious of what OPAs upper age limit is for proposals. If 24 is out of that range, is there room to share data that justifies why we are looking to go to age 24?
The statutory mandate of the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program is to fund medically accurate and age appropriate programs that reduce teen pregnancy. If the applicant can justify that the program reduces teen pregnancy or is a strategy for preventing teenage pregnancy, OPA can likely fund the applicant as the age range of the youth being served is not explicit in the statutory mandate. A program that blends in participants who are slightly over 19 could be feasible if a solid justification is given. However, this does not mean that any age range is appropriate.
Is it acceptable for the external evaluator to be the grantee as long as the external evaluator is not implementing or designing any of the programs under evaluation? Can the awardee (lead agency) test their own intervention as part of the project?
Yes, however there are important considerations. Applicants should keep in the mind the purpose of this funding is establish, fund, coordinate, and support a multidisciplinary network of partners to develop and test innovative interventions in the selected priority area and disseminate those interventions that demonstrate effectiveness (FOA, p.3), not to only evaluate one intervention.
It is expected for evaluation to occur for the grant project as a whole, Expectation H “Monitor and Improve the Project” (FOA, p.24) and also for interventions, Expectation E “Test, Refine, and Evaluation Interventions” (FOA, p.22). It is important to recognize that during early testing and refining of interventions, evaluation staff do not need to be independent; however, when grantees and their partners conduct summative evaluations of interventions, it is expected that external, independent evaluation staff will be utilized (FOA, p.23).
Would external evaluator(s) be considered partners as part of a funded network?
Applicants are to determine the best structure for their partnership and collaboration based on their project goals and one that considers equity (FOA, p.20-21).
The word “impact” and “effective” are used throughout the grant. These have a very specific definition for the TPP Tier 2 Rigorous Evaluation grant, but it seems like they are being use differently in this FOA. Could you define how these are being used?
This funding opportunity is completely separate from the Funding Opportunity No. AH-TP2-20-001. For this FOA, applicants are expected to describe how they would determine effectiveness of interventions (FOA, p.23).
Please note that as this is a cooperative agreement, which allows for substantial involvement by OPA and can include reviewing evaluation and testing design, questions, and measures (FOA, p.27).
Is there a minimal level of evaluation that must be conducted for each intervention that is being evaluated by the network? Do the testing and evaluation methods have to be traditional public health methods or can be proposed methods from other fields (e.g., design, marketing, communications, etc.)?
No, there is not a minimal level of evaluation. The applicant is expected to describe its plan for testing and evaluation in the application. Grantees are expected to use testing and evaluation methods appropriate for the stage of intervention development, collecting and analyzing data to make changes and assess impacts (FOA, p.22).
Please note that as this is a cooperative agreement, OPA’s substantial programmatic involvement will include reviewing evaluation and testing design, questions, and measures (FOA, p.27)
Can you please clarify if the expectation is that we evaluate the network or the intervention proposed/tested by the network partner?
Both. Applicants are to conduct evaluation of the project overall, as a whole (Expectation H – Monitor and Improve the Project, FOA p.24) and also expected to conduct evaluation of specific interventions (Expectation E – Test, Refine, and Evaluation Interventions, FOA p.22).
Do we need to have an IRB already approved by beginning of the funding period?
The FOA does not include this expectation. However, the applicant is expected to navigate the IRB process, and receive IRB approval, when needed (FOA, p.23).
Can you clarify expectations around dissemination of interventions deemed to be effective, other than "accessible and available to others"? Is the expectation that these interventions would be free or is it more important to have an infrastructure to support the effective marketing and dissemination of these programs that would require purchasing the programs?
The FOA does not specify if intervention(s) would need to be free or the importance of having an infrastructure to support dissemination of interventions. Applicants are expected to determine the best plan, and respond to the questions included on page 36 of the FOA.
It is not clear if it would be appropriate as part of our network’s continuous review of the science in our selected priority area to also identify interventions that have already been developed and tested and meet our defined criteria for “effective” but that have not been disseminated and made accessible and available to others to then translate those interventions into something that can be practically accessible to others and disseminate those interventions as part of our network approach and activities in addition to the above activities.
The FOA does not specify which stage interventions should start in, whether they need to go through all three stages, or whether interventions need to progress linearly (i.e., from exploring/developing to testing/evaluating to disseminating), other than to say that awardees are expected to disseminate those interventions deemed effective. Applicants are expected to make the case for how their project will include multiple interventions and make a measurable impact on their priority area (FOA, p.15).
How much funding do we need to provide to our partners?
Applicants are expected to sub-award at least half of their total grant to partners. Partners receiving sub-awards may be involved in any activity to support the network. (FOA, pp. 20-21)
Do all partners need to receive funding to be a part of the innovation network?
No. Not all partners in the network need to receive a sub-award from the applicant organization to support the project. In fact, having partners with in-kind, separate, or supplemental funding sources can help boost the sustainability of the network. (FOA, p. 21)
Do applicants need to submit a budget narrative for all three years of the grant in the application, or just for the first year of the grant?
The FOA states that applicants should provide a budget justification, which includes explanatory text and line-item detail, for the first year of the proposed project. For subsequent budget years, applicants should provide a summary narrative and line item budget. For categories or items that differ significantly from the first budget year, provide a detailed justification explaining these changes. Note, do not include costs beyond the first budget year in the object class budget in box 6 of the SF- 424A or box 18 of the SF-424; the amounts entered in these sections should only reflect the first budget year. As a reminder, the Budget Narrative does not count toward your total application page limit. (FOA, pp. 30-31)
In the FOA regarding the budget, it indicates that the budget narrative should “Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, and allocation of the proposed costs.” Do we have to show reasonableness for all costs or is reasonableness for higher priced items, computers, equipment, capital costs, etc.? Can you provide an example? To what extent to we have to show necessity for costs in the budget narrative? How should be indicate the necessity of items requested in the budget? Can you provide an example?
Your budget narrative should discuss the necessity, reasonableness and allocation, for all cost included with the submitted budget and not just for higher priced items. While preparing the budget narrative portion of your application for submission, please continue to review the budget narrative guidance of the FOA pages 30-40. To further assist, please review the guidance provided starting on page 32 of the FOA under Object Class Description and Required Justification. When completing each cost category of the budget narrative such as Personnel, Fringe, Supplies, Equipment … etc., follow the descriptions under each category for assistance with writing the needed justification to support the each cost.
Can you please confirm that the budget narrative will not count towards the total page limit for the application?
The Project Narrative, and total application including appendices, must adhere to the page limit indicated in Application Disqualification Criteria listed in Section C (Project Narrative must not exceed 50 pages and the total application including narrative and appendices must not exceed 100 pages total). The page limit does not include the Budget Narrative (including budget tables), required forms, assurances, and certifications as described in the Application Disqualification Criteria. (FOA, pp. 21-22)
Can you please clarify the funding floor and ceiling? Is it $1 million and $2 million over the three years, or per year for three years?
The anticipated award floor for each annual budget period is $1,000,000 and the anticipated award ceiling per annual budget period is $2,000,000. These amounts are anticipated to be awarded annually each year over a three period as specified within the FOA.
Does the salary cap apply to the sub-awardees as well as the lead applicant?
Yes and as specified within the FOA, this salary rate limitation also applies to subawards/subcontracts under an HHS/OASH award. As of January 2020, the Executive Level II salary cap is $197,300.
Is the Salary limit a max for the entire award or for an individual salary allowable?
The Salary limit cap is applicable to a per person individual’s salary. As of January 2020, the Executive Level II salary cap is $197,300. This amount reflects an individual’s base salary exclusive of fringe benefits and any income that an individual working on the award project may be permitted to earn outside of the duties to the applicant organization. This salary rate limitation also applies to subawards/subcontracts under an HHS/OASH award.
We are writing regarding AH-TP2-20-002 and the requirement to “subaward” at least half of the total grant to partners. Can you please clarify if fulfilment of this requirement is solely counted with expenses budgeted under “Contractual”? Or whether we can account for these expenses if they are embedded in other categories? For example, we plan to engage some partners through individual consultancies, and also pay for their associated travel. We would then be counting some of the expenses in “Other direct costs” to count towards the requirement. Is this allowable? And finally, does the 50% to partners need to happen each year? Or can it be cumulatively?
This is allowable and please review the funding opportunity announcement and look under Budget Narrative Content. Under this section you’ll see Contractual Description and the various type of cost which can be included under this section of your budget narrative, under the Other Description, you’ll see examples to be placed here as well, such as consultant and other unique cost and activities. At least half of the total awarded amount to partners is expected during each annual budget period.
Due to the nature of the grant we will have multiple sub recipients and I wanted to clarify the budget requirements for sub recipients and where it should be placed in the application. On page 44 of the FOA it includes the language I have attached to the bottom of this email. The budget form in the grants.gov workspace only allows budget details for one organization, where would you like to see the sub recipients’ full budgets and should it be in the exact same format as the SF-424A form that we will be required to complete as the primary organization?
Please review the Budget Narrative Content section of the FOA. Just as shown within this section of the FOA and when creating your Budget Narrative justification, list the cost from top to bottom by object class category and similar to the SF-424A. Further itemize each individual contracts or subaward’s cost and activities under the CONTRACTUAL cost line. For your contractual description (k): Costs of all contracts or subawards for services and goods except for those that belong under other categories such as equipment, supplies, construction, etc. Include third-party evaluation contracts, if applicable, and contracts or subawards with subrecipient organizations (with budget detail), including delegate agencies and specific project(s) and/or businesses to be financed by the applicant. This line item is not for individual consultants.
Given the impact of COVID 19 on most organizations, in particular, non-profit and other relevant organizations likely to be applying directly or as partners, we greatly appreciate OPA’s extension of the deadline and the relaxation regarding signed MOU or LOCs for all named partners at the time of application, although that is what we are aiming for. More burdensome for network partners during this time is to provide detailed line items budgets. It appears that it would be acceptable to provide estimated totals for both named and unnamed network partners as part of our overall detailed budget and justification and then provide detailed budgets for named partners at the time of the award. Can you please confirm that that approach is acceptable?
Yes and under the COVID19 circumstance, it would be acceptable to provide estimated totals for both the named and unnamed network partners as part of your overall detailed budget narrative justification. If you plan to do so, it should be clearly mentioned within your application’s submission. You should provide a time line in which this data will be provided where you’ll provide the itemized budgets narrative justification for both the named and unnamed partners if awarded.
Content last reviewed on April 14, 2020