Contact Us Search: All EPA NCEE

• You are here: EPA Home
• NCEE
• Grants & Funding
• Grant Solicitations

Grant Solicitations

Please see the MSWord version (190kb) or PDF version of our 2008 Grant Solicitation (151kb).

The complete text of the solicitation is found below.

Vacancy: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Announcement Title: Environmental Economics Workshops

Action: Request for Initial Proposals (RFIP)

Announcement Number: EPA-OPEI-NCEE-08-01

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) : 66.611 Environmental Policy and Innovation Grants

Due Date : The closing date and time for receipt of applications is March 24, 2008 at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). Applications submitted in hard copy (paper) and must be received in the Program Office by the closing date and time to receive consideration. Applications submitted through http://www.Grants.gov must be received by Grants.gov no later than March 24, 2008 4:00 p.m. EST.

OVERVIEW

The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) is soliciting Proposals for Federal assistance in sponsoring “Environmental Economics Workshops.” NCEE is interested in supporting Environmental and Resource Economics workshops in each of the following categories:

(1) Dissertation Workshops – the goal of these workshops is to attract the best and brightest graduate students/new PhDs and improve the quality of current research topics in environmental economics.
(2) Methods Development and Training Workshops – these workshops should provide guidance and training on a specific analytical activity of importance in environmental economics.
(3) Current Issues Workshops – these workshops should advance the field of environmental economics by exploring current and emerging issues of national or regional significance .

Proposals received after the deadline will not be considered. Eligible applicants include States, territories, the District of Columbia, Indian Tribes, intrastate and interstate organizations, and possessions of the U.S. Eligible applicants also include public and private universities and colleges, hospitals, laboratories, other public or private nonprofit institutions, and international organizations. Nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying activities as defined in Section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 are not eligible to apply. “For profit” organizations are generally not eligible for funding. Some of EPA's statutes may limit assistance to specific types of interested applications.

The total award amount is anticipated to be $500,000. Individual proposals must be for less than $200,000 to be considered. Assistance agreements may be awarded for project periods of up to 5 years where appropriate. Individual proposals must not involve more than one of the above three categories (i.e., dissertation, methods development and training, and current issues). Institutions and principal investigators may submit multiple but not duplicate proposals. Individual assistance agreements may be fully or incrementally funded. Cost sharing is not required. EPA anticipates awarding 6 to 15 assistance agreements under this announcement, as either grants or cooperative agreements.
A complete copy of this announcement, including discussion of application materials and requirements, is posted at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/GrantSolicitations.html .

Contents by Section

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Introduction
B. Background
C. Authority and Regulations
D. Specific Workshop Areas of Interest/Outputs and Outcomes
1. Dissertation Workshops
2. Methods Development and Training Workshops
3. Current Issues Workshops
4. Other Workshop Considerations
E. References
F. Special Requirements

II. Award Information
III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants
B. Cost Sharing or Match
C. Other Criteria

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Internet Address to Request Application
B. Content and Form of Application Submission
1. Standard Form SF424 – Application for Federal Assistance
2. Key Contacts
3. Narrative Proposal
4. Budget
5. Documentation of Qualifications
6. Application and Submission Information
7. Guidelines, Limitations and Additional Requirements
C. Submission Dates and Times
D. Funding Restrictions
E. Grants.gov Instruction
F. Intergovernmental Review
G. Application and Submission Information

V. Application Review Information

A. Specific Evaluation Criteria
1. Dissertation Workshops
2. Methods Development and Training Workshops
3. Current Issues Workshops
B. Selection Process

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award Notices
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
C. Reporting
D. Disputes
E. Nonprofit Administrative Capability Clause
F. Human Subjects
G. Management Fees

VII. Agency Contacts
VIII. Other Information

Section I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Introduction
The EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) supports leading-edge research to stimulate the sound use of economics that fulfills EPA's mission to protect human health and safeguard the natural environment. One way to accomplish this mission is to provide financial support for conferences that further environmental economics and closely related research by communicating ideas, knowledge, expertise, innovation and creativity in solving complex environmental issues.

B. Background
The agreements resulting from this RFIP are expected to support the Enabling Support Program objective and Regulatory/Economic Management and Analysis program project within the EPA’s strategic planning architecture. The EPA’s 2006 Strategic Plan may be found at http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2006/entire_report.pdf (PDF) (184 pp, 11.56 MB) These projects will also support one or more of the efforts undertaken under Goal 1 (Clean Air and Global Climate Change), Goal 2 (Clean and Safe Water), Goal 3 (Land Preservation and Restoration) and Goal 4 (Healthy Communities and Ecosystems) with reference to the Enhance Science and Research objectives for each (1.6, 2.3, 3.3 and 4.4, respectively). The overall goal of the projects is to elevate the state of knowledge of practitioners of environmental economics, confirm the adequacy and robustness of methods used to conduct economic analyses, and apply those methods to solve relevant and important problems. Through this program, EPA expects the following outcomes: (a) improve research and presentation skills; (b) improve the capabilities of environmental economists and survey researchers to measure quantitative benefits to human health, the environment, and communities; (c) support partnerships between environmental economists, EPA, other federal, state, and local agencies, survey researchers, and other interested parties, (d) encourage more empirical studies on environmental economics, and an increased capacity to evaluate the economic benefits, costs, and impacts of environmental programs, and (e) provide additional information on opportunity costs, the measurement of benefits, costs and impacts, and advancing our knowledge on a wider array of environmental economic principles and tools.

C. Authority and Regulations
Workshops supported by this request could include improving air quality and water quality, as well as addressing disposal of solid wastes. The statutory authority for funding this assistance agreement is found in:

Clean Air Act, as amended, Section 103, 42 U.S.C. 7403
Clean Water Act, as amended, Section 104, 33 U.S.C. 1254
Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended, Section 1442, 42 U.S.C. 300 j-1
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, Section 8001, 42 U.S.C. 6981
Toxic Substances Control Act, Section 10, 15 U.S.C. 2609
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Section 20, 7 U.S.C. 136r
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, Section 311, 42 U.S.C. 9660

For conferences with an international aspect, the above statutes are supplemented, as appropriate, by the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102 (2) (F).

Applicable regulations include: 40 CFR Part 30 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations), 40 CFR Part 31 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments) and 40 CFR Part 40 (Research and Demonstration Grants). Applicable OMB Circulars include: OMB Circular A-21 (Cost Principles for Educational Institutions) relocated to 2 CFR Part 220, OMB Circular A-87 (Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments) relocated to 2 CFR Part 225, OMB Circular A-102 (Grants and Cooperative Agreements With State and Local Governments), OMB Circular A-110 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit Organizations) relocated to 2 CFR Part 215, and OMB Circular A-122, (Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations) relocated to 2 CFR Part 230.

D. Specific Workshop Areas of Interest/Objectives and Outcomes
NCEE is seeking Proposals for workshops in three different areas (categories). Separate Initial Proposals are requested for each of the following three areas:

1. Dissertation Workshops

Purpose – The purpose of these workshops is to improve the quality of current and future research in environmental and resource economics and related research topics by providing a forum for early and significant input for students pursuing, or considering pursing, a Ph.D. in environmental and resource economics. The goal of these workshops is to promote the field of environmental and resource economics by fostering a collegial atmosphere for mentoring students and giving constructive feedback on research ideas and projects, thus enticing top quality graduate students to the field to do cutting edge research. The workshop should focus on research in its early stages with no formal papers expected. It is intended that university faculty member(s) and others with significant research experience will participate in providing constructive advice to current or potential graduate students on their research agenda. Topics are not restricted, other than to the broad field of environmental and resource economics.

Intended participants – These workshops are intended to provide support and significant early guidance to graduate students who are currently pursuing, or considering pursuing, a Ph.D. in environmental and resource economics. Potential student participants are expected to be at the Master’s or Ph.D. level, although undergraduate students should not be precluded from participation. Mentor/discussants should have a Ph.D. and be established researchers in the field of environmental and resource economics.

Desirable characteristics – Applicants offering a graduate program granting degrees in environmental and resource economics will have the least difficulty satisfying the expertise criteria for this category.

2. Methods Development and Training Workshops

Purpose – The purpose of these workshops is to provide guidance and training on a specific analytical activity of importance in environmental economics and closely related economic analysis. The choice of analytical topic or activity should be based on two criteria: 1) it should be public policy relevant and 2) it should suffer from a lack of adequate treatment in texts, journals and other existing venues that serve as educational sources for students and practitioners in the field. The goals of these workshops are: to develop the theoretical basis for guidance of correct analytical approaches, to identify best practices that have been used by respected practitioners, to identify useful data sources, to describe and discuss potential problems typically faced by analysts and generally to educate an inexperienced audience about the activity. The workshop should give participants a shared understanding of techniques, define the process of deriving empirical information from existing research products and use the information to inform new analysis concerning an important environmental issue. The outcome of the workshop should be that attendees learn to conduct analysis at a higher level of quality and with greater credibility.

As the purpose of the workshops is to improve analytical activity, topics should be important to the conduct of public policy analysis. For example, elements of cost benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, regional economic impact analysis, simulation modeling, and mathematical programming and decision analyses represent some types of analytical activities used in policy analysis. Particular issues or problems arising when these or similar analyses are conducted in the context of environmental policy analysis would be appropriate topics for training workshops. In addition, topics could also represent an analytical problem that has not been fully resolved by prior work. In this case, the workshop would be less a teaching forum and more oriented toward resolving differences that have arisen in applied work. This form should not take on an issue that is in the early stage of development or for which appropriate theoretical bases do not exist. But it could focus on an issue that is still subject to some debate about best practices, best data or appropriate applications.

Intended participants – Since this type of workshop is a teaching and training forum, it is expected that the organizer will be a well respected expert on the topic at hand with knowledge of others who are relevant experts, and that the persons who will present materials and lead discussions at the workshop will be recognized expert practitioners either in the academic community or highly credible non-academic institutions. Generally it would be useful to involve researchers with a sound theoretical understanding of the topic as well as senior practitioners who have experience with the practical difficulties typically faced in conducting field work. We expect attendees would have undergraduate or graduate level training in economics but lack extensive experience in the particular analytical topic under discussion. The workshop should reach out to students as well as professional staff employed in the nonprofit sector, the private sector and the government sector at the federal, state or local level. The materials should be accessible to inexperienced or junior staff so long as they have the requisite training in economics; and the topic could also draw interest from more senior professionals who wish to learn about a topic they have not yet studied in depth.

Workshop format – In order to maximize exposure, applicants may offer to conduct the workshop more than once either in the same location in subsequent years or in a variety of locations; such initial proposals should make clear the need for multiple deliveries.

3. Current Issues Workshops

Purpose – The purpose of this type of workshop is to explore in depth a timely topic through the use of environmental economics analyses and closely related economic analysis techniques and to disseminate findings to a wide audience. Such findings should be useful in solving relevant environmental problems or resolving issues of significant debate. The workshop should offer original, timely topics or approaches to addressing the issues, while avoiding overlap with other conferences. The topic, as well as the design of the workshop, should aim to stimulate lively interest and interaction, which might extend to a much larger audience than those able to attend.

Intended participants – Those attending should be interested in the application of the findings of the workshop and may include economists, other scientists and staff employed in the non-profit, private or government sector. Identifying effective and innovative ways to attract the right participants and/or to disseminate workshop proceedings increases the workshop’s usefulness. The intended audience may reach beyond those attending, as workshop findings should be made available in a variety of ways, such as proceedings.

Workshop format – Designing the workshop format to encourage lively and effective interaction among presenters and participants increases its usefulness. Workshop initial proposals may choose either to identify a specific topic, or they may identify a process for selecting the topic and emphasize their expertise in meeting all of the criteria. In the former case, the initial proposal will be judged by how effectively the topic and the workshop design would achieve the purposes described above. In the latter case, the initial proposal will be judged based on the likelihood that the process will result in a topic and workshop design that achieves the purposes as described above.

4. Other Workshop Considerations

(a) Applicants may offer to develop an Internet based "virtual workshop" either as an adjunct to or a substitute for a traditional physical workshop. For example, an Internet based adjunct could be developed by first conducting a traditional workshop then establishing a web site which contains the basic materials presented in the original workshop together with a summary or transcript of the conversation that occurred in the original workshop. Alternatively, a completely virtual workshop could be offered in which a web site is developed containing the basic materials and then participants "attend" the workshop over a specified period of time to read the materials and interact with each other through a moderator by means of the Internet. Although we encourage applicants to be imaginative in devising new workshop formats, these will not necessarily be preferred to traditional workshops that require the physical presence of participants.

(b) Funding received through this program may be used for a variety of types of expenses including but not limited to: cost of renting workshop facilities, provision of light refreshments (not including alcohol); payments to organizers and presenters for their time, cost of travel and per diem expenses; purchase, development and distribution of presentation materials and financial assistance to participants to defray the cost of travel and per diem expenses. Funds should not be used to purchase equipment or facilities. In reviewing all initial proposals, the cost-effectiveness of the budget will be a factor in determining awards.

(c) This solicitation is not intended to provide funds for presentations that occur during the regularly scheduled annual meetings or conferences of existing professional organizations. Special sessions that are scheduled outside but contiguous with the regular meetings may be considered. Applicants should demonstrate that their initial proposal is consistent with this intent.

The anticipated outputs of these projects include providing policy relevant information regarding improved research tools and policy relevant research findings to workshop participants and to the interested public through workshop proceedings. The expected outcomes of awards for each of the three categories under this solicitation include but are not limited to the following:

• Improved quality and quantity of research on scientific and economic issues affecting human health and the environment.
• Innovation in addressing high-priority environmental problems making full use of economic information.
• Enhanced interdisciplinary dialogue on environmental research with cross-cutting applications between practitioners in the fields of economics and the environmental sciences.

E. References

2006-2011 EPA Strategic Plan, http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2006/entire_report.pdf (PDF) (184 pp, 11.56 MB)

F. Special Requirements
Groups of two or more eligible applicants may choose to form a consortium and submit a single application for this assistance agreement. The application must identify which organization will be the recipient of the assistance agreement and which organizations(s) will be sub-awardees of the recipient.
See Section V of the solicitation which addresses the evaluation of an applicant’s proposed contractors and subawardees. These instruments must be in compliance with the competitive Procurement Standards in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR 31.36 as appropriate.

Section II. AWARD INFORMATION
The total anticipated award amount is $500,000. Proposals must be for less than $200,000 to be considered. Assistance agreements may be awarded for project periods of up to 5 years where appropriate. Individual proposals will not be approved if they involve all three of the above areas. Institutions and principal investigators may submit multiple but not duplicate proposals. If incrementally funded in FY 2008, future funding is not guaranteed. EPA anticipates awarding 6 to 15 as either grants or cooperative agreements under this request

EPA reserves the right to either award fewer than 15 grants or to make no awards under this solicitation.

EPA will not consider applications for less than $15,000 or greater than $200,000. Any such application will be rejected without review.

EPA may award both grants and cooperative agreements under this announcement. Under a grant, EPA employees are not permitted to be substantially involved in the planning and execution of the conference.

Where appropriate, EPA may award cooperative agreements when substantial involvement between EPA employees and grant recipients is anticipated. Assistance recipients that are awarded cooperative agreements rather than grants are required to work closely with the EPA Project Officer and other EPA personnel, as determined by EPA, during the performance of the project. These collaborations may include data and information exchange, providing technical input to the conference agenda, selecting speakers, panelists, and/or attendees, and joint authorship of conference proceedings and/or journal articles on these activities. To ensure that all applications receive fair consideration, applicants may not identify these specific interactions in their application.

EPA reserves the right to partially fund proposals/applications by funding discrete activities, portions or phases of the proposed project. If EPA decides to partially fund the proposal/application, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal/application, or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and that maintains the integrity of the competition and the evaluation/selection process.

NCEE anticipates that applications under this announcement will be reviewed by April 30, 2008.

NCEE is not likely to authorize any pre-award costs, but applicants may request funds to cover pre-award costs that are incurred 90 days or less before the award date. If EPA determines that the requested pre-award costs comply with the OMB Circular A-87 ( Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a087/a87_2004.html ), and that the costs are justified as allocable to the project, then these costs may be included as allowable expenditures at the time that the assistance award document is prepared. However, if for any reason, EPA does not fund the application or the amount of the award is less than the applicant anticipated, then EPA is under no obligation to reimburse the applicant for these costs. Thus, applicants incur pre-award costs at their own risk.


Section III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants
Eligible applicants include States, territories, the District of Columbia, Indian Tribes, interstate organizations, intrastate organizations, and possessions of the U.S. Eligible applicants also include public and private universities and colleges, hospitals, laboratories, other public or private nonprofit institutions, and international organizations. Nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying activities as defined in Section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 are not eligible to apply. “For profit” organizations are generally not eligible for funding. Some of EPA's statutes may limit assistance to specific types of interested applications.
National laboratories funded by Federal Agencies (Federally-Funded Research and Development Centers, “FFRDCs”) may not apply. FFRDC employees may cooperate or collaborate with eligible applicants within the limits imposed by applicable legislation and regulations. They may participate in planning, conducting, and analyzing the research directed by the applicant, but may not direct projects on behalf of the applicant organization. The institution, organization, or governance receiving the award may contract with or provide subawards to FFRDC’s with funds through its grant from the EPA to an FFRDC for research personnel, supplies, equipment, and other expenses directly related to the research. (See Section IV.) However, salaries for permanent FFRDC employees may not be provided through this mechanism.

Federal Agencies may not apply. Federal employees are not eligible to serve in a principal leadership role on an assistance agreement, and may not receive salaries or augment their Agency’s appropriations in other ways (e.g., travel funds) through grants made by this program. In addition, EPA employees may not serve on the planning committee of an organization submitting an application. However, EPA employees may serve on planning committees after EPA has awarded funding.

B. Cost Sharing or Match
There are no cost-sharing or matching funds requirements. However the degree to which the project budget effectively uses EPA funds and/or leverages internal or external matching funds will be considered as part of the cost-effectiveness evaluation criteria. Allowable costs for nonprofit organizations are defined in OMB circular A-122; allowable costs for public entities are defined in OMB circular A-87. Leveraged funding or other resources need not be for eligible and allowable costs under the EPA assistance agreement unless the applicant proposes to provide a voluntary cost share or match.

If EPA accepts an offer for a voluntary cost share/match, applicants must meet their matching/sharing commitment as a condition of receiving EPA funding. Applicants may use their own funds or other resources for a voluntary match or cost share if the standards at 40 CFR 30.23 or 40 CFR 31.24, as applicable, are met. Only eligible and allowable costs may be used for voluntary matches or cost shares. Other Federal grants may not be used as matches or cost shares without specific statutory authority (e.g., Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grants). Voluntary cost shares or matches must be included in the budget as a planned cost.

Applicants who will seek funding from other sources but do not intend to include these funds as a voluntary match or cost share in the budget must explain how these other funds will be used. Applicants relying on additional funding from other sources should support their expectations (e.g., based on past successes in obtaining multiple funding sources). Fund-raising costs are not allowable costs under EPA grants.

C. Other Criteria
All of the following threshold criteria must be met by the time of application submission in order for an application to receive funding consideration. Only those applications that meet all of these criteria will be evaluated against the ranking criteria in Section V of this solicitation. Applicants deemed ineligible for funding consideration will be notified within 15 calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

1. The applicant must demonstrate that it is eligible to apply for financial assistance under this solicitation.

2. Applications that fail to demonstrate a public purpose of support or stimulation will not be funded. For example, applications that request funding for a research conference which primarily benefits a Federal program or provides a service for a Federal agency are not eligible.

3. To be eligible for funding consideration, a proposed conference’s focus must consist of activities within the statutory terms of EPA’s financial assistance authorities; specifically, the statute(s) listed in Section I.C. above. Generally, a project must address the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of air pollution, water pollution, solid/hazardous waste pollution, toxic substances control, or pesticide control depending on which statute(s) is listed in I.C. above.

These activities should relate to the gathering or transferring of information or advancing the state of knowledge. Applications should emphasize this “learning” concept, as opposed to “fixing” an environmental problem via a well-established method. Applications relating to other topics which are sometimes included within the term “environment” such as recreation, conservation, restoration, protection of wildlife habitats, etc., must describe the relationship of these topics to the statutorily required purpose of pollution prevention and/or control.

4. EPA will not consider applications for less than $15,000 or more than $200,000.

5. EPA will reject applications seeking funds for workshops/conferences that provide course work for professional certifications or those which primarily address implementation of regulations.

6. Applicants may submit separate applications for funding consideration in different workshop areas.

7. The applicant’s proposed conference, or the component of it to which the application for EPA funding applies, must focus on EPA mission related issues connected to protecting human health and safeguarding the natural environment as specified in Section I.B. which addresses the relationship to EPA’s Strategic Plan. Conference topics must also: (a) advance the scientific and technical economic research that promotes environmental protection; (b) explore current and emerging economic issues of importance to environmental protection and (c) encourage collaboration among the nation’s and possibly the world’s best scientists and economists in academia, business and nonprofit research institutes.

8. The applicant must include a plan (see Section IV.B.3.) in the application to make available to the scientific community all papers, articles and similar publications (e.g., proceedings) from conferences supported through this solicitation The materials must be available in a format and with documentation such that they may be used by others in the scientific community. Posting on a publicly available web site is an acceptable means of meeting this requirement.

9. Applicants must not identify EPA personnel that they intend to cooperate with in the application. This will ensure that all applications receive fair consideration.

10. Applications must substantially comply with the application submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section IV of this announcement. In addition, where a page limitation is expressed in Section IV with respect to parts of the application, pages in excess of the page limit will not be reviewed.

11. Applications must be received by the EPA, or Grants.gov, on or before March 24, 2008 or they will be returned to the sender without further consideration.

Section IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Internet Address to Request Application Package
Electronic applications submitted thru grants.gov are encouraged and recommended for this announcement.
See Section IV. E. Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements for instructions. Applicants who are unable to submit electronically through Grants.gov must contact Clay Ogg (ogg.clay@epa.gov), phone: 202-566-2315 for alternative application submission instructions. The application deadlines and other requirements of this solicitation still apply to individuals that use alternative submission methods.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission
The application is made by submitting the materials described below. It is essential that the application contain all information requested and be submitted in the described formats.

1. Standard Form 424 – Application for Federal Assistance – This form may be obtained in a fill-and-save PDF format at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/grants_forms.html .. Applicants should fill in this form as appropriate and include it as an attachment to their application.

Applicants should pay particular attention to the following items:

Item 5 - (under the ‘Name and telephone number of person to be contacted…’) give the name of the lead environmental economist/program contact, their phone number and e-mail address.

Item 5 - list the applicant’s DUNS number. If your organization does not have a DUNS number, one is obtainable by calling Dun and Bradstreet’s dedicated toll-free DUNS number request line at 1-866-705-5711 or by visiting the web site at http://www.dnb.com .

Item 11 – give both the descriptive title of the initial proposal.

Item 15 - list any anticipated leveraging funds (by source) and/or program income

Item 16 - address the requirements under Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.” See also IV.D below.

Item 18 - identify the Authorized Representative.

2. Key Contacts - The applicant must complete the “Key Contacts” form as the second page of the application: a Key Contacts continuation page is also available at http://www.epa.gov/ncer/rfa/forms . The Key Contacts form should also be completed for major sub-agreements (i.e., primary co-investigators). Please make certain that all contact information is accurate.

3. Narrative Proposal – Contains the project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion, and must provide:

(a) a concise description or abstract of the project (including literature citations),

(b) a justification for the proposed budget, and

(c) a discussion of how the initial proposal addresses each of the specific evaluation criteria (see Section V (A) Specific Evaluation Criteria).

The project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion together for Initial Proposals must be no longer than 15 pages. All of the above should be provided on 8 ½ x 11” pages, single-line spaced, using no smaller than 12-point type and 1” page margins. In reviewing the project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion write-up, reviewers will not consider any pages beyond these limits.

4. Budget

a. Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A) – Complete the SF-424A to indicate how you plan to expend the funds provided by EPA. There are no attachments. At a minimum, complete Section B- Budget Information and Section F-Other Budget Information. The total amount of EPA funding requested for the project period should be shown on line 5(e) and on line 6(k) of SF-424A. If indirect costs are included, the amount of indirect costs should be entered on line 6(j). The indirect cost rate (i.e., a percentage), the base (e.g., personnel costs and fringe benefits), and the amount should also be indicated on line 22. If your RFIP is submitted electronically through Grants.gov, also include the Budget Narrative Attachment Form – Detailed Itemized Budget. Prepare the Detailed Itemized Budget and attach it by clicking on “Budget Narrative Attachment Form” and then “Add Mandatory Budget Narrative.”

If a subaward, such as a subgrant with an educational institution, is included in the application, provide a separate budget and budget justification for the subaward. Include the total amount for the subaward under “Other” in the master budget. Any project containing sub awards or procurement contracts that constitute more than 40% of the total direct cost of the application will be subject to special review. Additional justification for use of these must be provided, discussing the need for the sub award/procurement contract to accomplish the objectives of the research project.

Please note that institutional cost-sharing is not required. However, if cost-sharing is proposed, a brief statement concerning cost-sharing should be added to the budget justification, and estimated dollar amounts must be included in the appropriate categories in the budget table.

b. Management Fees - When formulating a conference budget, applicants must not include management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs and indirect costs at the rate approved by the applicant’s cognizant audit agency, or at the rate provided for by the terms of the agreement negotiated with EPA. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs that are not allowable under EPA assistance agreements. Management fees or similar charges may not be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the scope of work.

5. Documentation of Qualifications (no page limit) - The applicant must include in this attachment resumes of all principal staff who will have a major role in the project. If your RFIP is submitted electronically through Grants.gov, use the “Other Attachments Form” in the “Optional Documents” box to attach a copy of the biographical sketch of each project manager for the proposed project.

6. Application and Submission Information – All applicants must submit a plan for tracking and measuring progress for the outcomes and outputs listed in Section I.

Environmental Results Past Performance : Submit a list of federally funded assistance agreements that your organization performed within the last three years (no more than 5, and preferably EPA agreements), and describe how you documented and/or reported on whether you were making progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outputs and outcomes) under those agreements. If you were not making progress, please indicate whether, and how, you documented why not. In evaluating applicants under this factor in Section V , EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources, including information from EPA files and from current and prior Federal agency grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant). If you do not have any relevant or available environmental results past performance information, please indicate this in the proposal and you will receive a neutral score for this factor under Section V.

Programmatic Capability : Submit a list of federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope and relevance to the proposed project that your organization performed within the last three years (no more than 5, and preferably EPA agreements) and describe (i) whether, and how, you were able to successfully complete and manage those agreements and (ii) your history of meeting the reporting requirements under those agreements including submitting acceptable final technical reports. In evaluating applicants under these factors in Section V , EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources, including information from EPA files and from current and prior Federal agency grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant). If you do not have any relevant or available past performance or reporting information, please indicate this in the proposal and you will receive a neutral score for these factors under Section V.
In addition, provide information on your organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project, and your staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed project.


7. Guidelines, Limitations, and Additional Requirements

a. Letters of Intent/Letters of Support

Letters of intent to provide resources for the proposed research or to document intended interactions are limited to one brief paragraph committing the availability of a resource (e.g., use of a person's time or equipment) or intended interaction (e.g., sharing of data, as-needed consultation) that is described in the Conference Plan. Letters of intent are to be included as an addition to the budget justification documents.

All letters that do not commit a resource vital to the success of the application are considered letters of support . Letters of support, and letters of intent that exceed one brief paragraph are considered part of the Conference Plan and are included in the 15 page limit.

Note: Letters of intent or support must be part of the application; letters submitted separately will not be accepted. Any transactions between the successful applicant and parties providing letters of support or intent financed with EPA grant funds are subject to the funding restrictions described in Section IV. D.

b. Confidentiality

By submitting an application in response to this solicitation, the applicant grants the EPA permission to make limited disclosures of the application to technical reviewers both within and outside the Agency for the express purpose of assisting the Agency with evaluating the application. Information from a pending or unsuccessful application will be kept confidential to the fullest extent allowed under law; information from a successful application may be publicly disclosed to the extent permitted by law.

In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a portion of the application as confidential business information (e.g., intellectual property). EPA will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2. Applicants must clearly mark applications or portions of applications they claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, the EPA is not required to make an inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by 40 CFR 2.204(c) (2) prior to disclosure.

C. Submission Dates and Times
This solicitation closes at 4:00 pm., Eastern Time on March 24, 2008. Applications submitted after 4:00 pm., Eastern Time on March 24, 2008 will be rejected without review.

It should be noted that this schedule may be changed without prior notification because of factors not anticipated at the time of announcement. In the case of a change in the solicitation closing date, a new date will be posted on the NCEE web site ( http://www.epa.gov/economics ) and a modification posted on www.grants.gov..

D. Funding Restrictions
The funding mechanism for all awards issued under this solicitation will consist of assistance agreements from the EPA. All award decisions are subject to the availability of funds.

In accordance with the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301 et seq., the primary purpose of an assistance agreement is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by federal statute, rather than acquisition for the direct benefit or use of the Agency. EPA will not fund conferences with subject matter primarily directed toward federal scientists.

Agency policy prevents EPA technical staff and managers from providing individual applicants information that may create an unfair competitive advantage. Consequently, EPA employees will not review, comment, advise, and/or provide technical assistance to applicants preparing applications in response to this solicitation, nor will they endorse an application or discuss in any manner how the Agency will apply the published evaluation criteria for this competition. Applicants having questions about this solicitation should e-mail their questions to NCEE@epa.gov , using “Grant Solicitation Question” as the subject. Questions and answers will be posted on an NCEE website supporting the solicitation, http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/GrantsFAQ.html .

EPA proposes to use cooperative agreements and not grants for those workshops where substantial EPA collaboration regarding the scope of work, organizational structure, mode of operation, dissemination of findings, and other management processes is desired. The EPA also will monitor research progress through annual reports provided by grantees and other contacts, including site visits, with the Principal Investigator.

Collaborative applications involving more than one institution must be submitted as a single administrative package from one of the institutions involved. Each proposed project must be able to be completed within the project period and with the initial award of funds. Applicants should request the entire amount of money needed to complete the project. Recipients should not anticipate additional funding beyond the initial award of funds for a specific project.

EPA awards funds to one eligible applicant as the recipient even if other eligible applicants are named as partners or co-applicants or members of a coalition or consortium. The recipient is accountable to EPA for the proper expenditure of funds.

Funding may be used to provide subgrants or subawards of financial assistance, which includes using sub awards or sub grants to fund partnerships, provided the recipient complies with applicable requirements for sub awards or sub grants including those contained in 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31, as appropriate. Applicants must compete contracts for services and products, including consultant contracts, and conduct cost and price analyses, to the extent required by the procurement provisions of the regulations at 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31, as appropriate. The regulations also contain limitations on consultant compensation. Applicants are not required to identify subawardees/subgrantees and/or contractors (including consultants) in their application. However, if they do, the fact that an applicant selected for award has named a specific subawardee/subgrantee, contractor, or consultant in the application EPA selects for funding does not relieve the applicant of its obligations to comply with subaward/subgrant and/or competitive procurement requirements as appropriate. Please note that applicants may not award sole source contracts to consulting, engineering or other firms assisting applicants with the application solely based on the firm's role in preparing the application.

Successful applicants cannot use sub grants or sub awards to avoid requirements in EPA grant regulations for competitive procurement by using these instruments to acquire commercial services or products from for-profit organizations to carry out its assistance agreement. The nature of the transaction between the recipient and the subawardee or sub grantee must be consistent with the standards for distinguishing between vendor transactions and sub recipient assistance under Subpart B Section .210 of OMB Circular A-133 ., and the definitions of sub award at 40 CFR 30.2(ff) or sub grant at 40 CFR 31.3, as applicable. EPA will not be a party to these transactions. Applicants acquiring commercial goods or services must comply with the competitive procurement standards in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR Part 31.36 and cannot use a subaward/subgrant as the funding mechanism.

E. Grants.gov Instructions
The electronic submission of your application must be made by an official representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more information, go to http://www.grants.gov .and click on “Get Registered” on the left side of the page. Note that the registration process may take a week or longer to complete. If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office to designate an AOR and ask that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible.

To begin the application process under this grant announcement, go to To begin the application process under this grant announcement, go to http://www.grants.gov. and click on the “Apply for Grants” tab on the left side of the page. Then click on “Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Instructions” to download the PureEdge viewer and obtain the application package for the announcement. To download the PureEdge viewer click on the “PureEdge Viewer” link. Once you have downloaded the viewer, you may retrieve the application package by entering the Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OPEI-NCEE-08-01 , or the CFDA number that applies to the announcement (CFDA 66.611), in the appropriate field. You may also be able to access the application package by clicking on the “Application” button at the top right of the synopsis page for this announcement on http://www.grants.gov .(to find the synopsis page, go to http://www.grants.gov. and click on the “Find Grant Opportunities” button on the left side of the page and then go to Search Opportunities and use the Browse by Agency feature to find EPA opportunities).

Application Submission Deadline: Your organization’s AOR must submit your complete application electronically to EPA through Grants.gov ( http://www.grants.gov ). no later than March 24, 2008.

Please submit all of the proposal/application materials described below. To view the full funding announcement, go or go to http://www.grants.gov .and click on “Find Grant Opportunities” on the left side of the page and then click on Search Opportunities/Browse by Agency and select Environmental Protection Agency.

Proposal/Application Materials

The following forms and documents are required to be submitted under this announcement:

I. Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)
II. Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A)
III. Narrative Proposal/Work Plan/Project Proposal
IV. Key Contacts Form (IV.B.3., above).

The proposal/application package must include all of the following materials:

I. Standard Form (SF) 424, Application for Federal Assistance
Complete the form. There are no attachments.

Please be sure to include organization fax number and email address in Block 5 of the Standard Form SF 424.
Please note that the organizational Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Number System (DUNS) number must be included on the SF-424. Organizations may obtain a DUNS number at no cost by calling the toll-free DUNS number request line at 1-866-705-5711.

II. Standard Form SF 424A – Budget Information:
Complete the form. There are no attachments.

The total amount of federal funding requested for the project period should be shown on line 5(e) and on line 6(k) of SF-424A. If indirect costs are included, the amount of indirect costs should be entered on line 6(j). The indirect cost rate (i.e., a percentage), the base (e.g., personnel costs and fringe benefits), and the amount should also be indicated on line 22.

III. Narrative Proposal – Contains the project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion, and must provide:

(a) a concise description or abstract of the project (including literature citations),

(b) a justification for the proposed budget, and

(c) a discussion of how the initial proposal addresses each of the specific evaluation criteria (see Section V(A) Specific Evaluation Criteria).

The project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion together for Initial Proposals must be no longer than 15 pages. All of the above should be provided on 8 ½ x 11” pages, single-line spaced, using no smaller than 12-point type, and 1” page margins. In reviewing the project description, budget justification and evaluation criteria discussion write-up, reviewers will not consider any pages beyond these limits.

IV. EPA Form 5700-54, Key Contacts Form

Complete the form. There are no attachments.

If additional pages are needed, attach these additional pages to the electronic application package by using the “Other Attachments Form” in the “Optional Documents” box. (See Application Preparation and Submission Instructions below for more details.)

The document should be readable in PDF, MS Word or Word Perfect WP6/7/8 for Windows and consolidated into a single file.

Application Preparation and Submission Instructions

Documents I through III listed under Application Materials above should appear in the “Mandatory Documents” box on the Grants.gov Grant Application Package page.

For documents I and II, click on the appropriate form and then click “Open Form” below the box. The fields that must be completed will be highlighted in yellow. Optional fields and completed fields will be displayed in white. If you enter an invalid response or incomplete information in a field, you will receive an error message. When you have finished filling out each form, click “Save.” When you return to the electronic Grant Application Package page, click on the form you just completed, and then click on the box that says, “Move Form to Submission List.” This action will move the document over to the box that says, “Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.”

For document III, you will need to attach electronic files. Prepare your narrative proposal as described above in Section IV.B.3. and save the document to your computer as an MS Word, PDF or WordPerfect file. When you are ready to attach your proposal to the application package, click on “Project Narrative Attachment Form,” and open the form. Click “Add Mandatory Project Narrative File,” and then attach your proposal (previously saved to your computer) using the browse window that appears. You may then click “View Mandatory Project Narrative File” to view it. Enter a brief descriptive title of your project in the space beside “Mandatory Project Narrative File Filename;” the filename should be no more than 40 characters long. If there other attachments that you would like to submit to accompany your proposal, you may click “Add Optional Project Narrative File” and proceed as before. When you have finished attaching the necessary documents, click “Close Form.” When you return to the “Grant Application Package” page, select the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” and click “Move Form to Submission List.” The form should n now appear in the box that says, “Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.”

Once you have finished filling out all of the forms/attachments and they appear in one of the “Completed Documents for Submission” boxes, click the “Save” button that appears at the top of the Web page. It is suggested that you save the document a second time, using a different name, since this will make it easier to submit an amended package later if necessary. Please use the following format when saving your file: “Applicant Name – FY06 – Assoc Prog Supp – 1st Submission” or “Applicant Name – FY 06 Assoc Prog Supp – Back-up Submission.” If it becomes necessary to submit an amended package at a later date, then the name of the 2nd submission should be changed to “Applicant Name – FY06 Assoc Prog Supp – 2nd Submission.”

Once your application package has been completed and saved, send it to your AOR for submission to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov. Please advise your AOR to close all other software programs before attempting to submit the application package through Grants.gov.

In the “Application Filing Name” box, your AOR should enter your organization’s name (abbreviate where possible), the fiscal year (e.g., FY06), and the grant category (e.g., Assoc Prog Supp). The filing name should not exceed 40 characters. From the “Grant Application Package” page, your AOR may submit the application package by clicking the “Submit” button that appears at the top of the page. The AOR will then be asked to verify the agency and funding opportunity number for which the application package is being submitted. If problems are encountered during the submission process, the AOR should reboot his/her computer before trying to submit the application package again. [It may be necessary to turn off the computer (not just restart it) before attempting to submit the package again.] If the AOR continues to experience submission problems, he/she may contact Grants.gov for assistance by phone at 1-800-518-4726 or email at http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp .or contact Clay Ogg (ogg.clay@epa.gov).

Application packages submitted thru grants.gov will be time/date stamped electronically.

If you have not received a confirmation of receipt from EPA (not from grants.gov) within 30 days of the application deadline, please contact Clay Ogg (ogg.clay@epa.gov). Failure to do so may result in your application not being reviewed.

Note: Microsoft Vista and Word 2007 Users

Please note that Grants.gov does not currently support the new Microsoft Vista Operating system. The PureEdge software used by Grants.gov for forms is not compatible with Vista. Grants.gov will be reviewing this new product to determine if it can be supported in the future.
In addition, the new version of Microsoft Word saves documents with the extension .DOCX. The Grants.gov system does not process Microsoft Word documents with the extension .DOCX. When submitting Microsoft Word attachments to Grants.gov, please use the version of Microsoft Word that ends in .DOC. If you have any questions regarding this matter please email the Grants.gov Contact Center at support@grants.gov .or call 1-800-518-4726.

F. Intergovernmental Review – All applicants should be aware that formal requests for assistance might be subject to intergovernmental review under Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs. Applicants should contact their State's Single Point of Contact (SPOC's) for further information. A list of SPOC's can be accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html .. This information should be addressed in Block 16 of the required form, SF 424.

G. Management Fees
Management Fees: When formulating budgets for proposals/applications, applicants must not include management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs and indirect costs at the rate approved by the applicants cognizant audit agency, or at the rate provided for by the terms of the agreement negotiated with EPA. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs that are not allowable under EPA assistance agreements. Management fees or similar charges may not be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the scope of work.

Section V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
After EPA reviews proposals for threshold eligibility purposes as described in Section III , NCEE will conduct a merit evaluation of each complete proposal from an eligible applicant. (More than one reviewer will read each proposal). In this merit evaluation, proposals will first be evaluated and ranked by a panel using the specific and general evaluation criteria discussed below. The EPA Approving Official will then make final determination on the number of assistance agreements to fund. Highly ranked applicants who remain under consideration for funding will then be asked to submit complete grant application packages on an accelerated basis in order to meet EPA funding process deadlines, should their application be selected for funding.

A. Specific Evaluation Criteria

1. Dissertation Workshops : Applications under this subject will be evaluated against the following technical criteria. The importance of the criteria is indicated in percentage terms in parentheses after each criterion, and applicants are advised that their Initial Proposals should explicitly address each of the following to facilitate evaluation:

(1) Expected Results, Benefits, Outputs, and Outcomes: Under this criterion applicants would articulate the results expected to be achieved during the workshop (outputs) and the benefits of the results (outcomes). Applicants should discuss the public interest values and environmental benefits the proposed workshop will provide to the non-Federal scientific community and how the topics presented meet the needs of a broad range of stakeholders. Applicants must also concisely describe how progress toward achieving the outputs/outcomes will be tracked and measured. (5%)
(2) Environmental Results Past Performance Criterion: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent and quality to which they adequately documented and/or reported on their progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outcomes and outputs) under Federal agency assistance agreements performed within the last three years, and if such progress was not being made whether the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. Note: In evaluating applicants under this factor, EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting history will receive a neutral score for this factor. (5%)
(3) Programmatic Capability: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on their ability to successfully complete and manage the proposed project taking into account the following factors: (i) its past performance in successfully completing and managing federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years, (ii) its history of meeting reporting requirements under federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years and submitting acceptable final technical reports under those agreements, (iii) its organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project, and (iv) its staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed project. Note: In evaluating applicants under this criterion, the Agency will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance or reporting history (items i and ii above), will receive a neutral score for those elements of this criterion. (10%)
(4) Student Instruction: Applicants will be judged on the likely success of the workshop in providing constructive feedback, training, and advice to top quality graduate students. EPA will consider the method in which students are selected for participation in the workshop, the format used to provide feedback to the students, and the expertise of the mentors selected to participate in the workshop. (30%)
(5) Cost-effectiveness: Applicants will be judged by the absence of similar workshop topics and the reasonableness of the projected costs of the workshop. (20%)
(6) Credibility and Relevance: Applicants will be evaluated based on the likely credibility of the resulting research to the research communities and stakeholders involved. This will be judged primarily on the professional standing and demonstrated success of the organization in hosting workshops, and the relevance and usefulness of the proposed research topic to solving important environmental problems. (30%)

2. Methods Development and Training Workshops : Applications under this subject will be evaluated against the following technical criteria. If more than one workshop is included in the proposal, each individual proposed workshop will be evaluated separately where included in the same proposal from the same applicant. The importance of the criteria is indicated in percentage terms in parentheses after each criterion, and applicants are advised that their Initial Proposals should explicitly address each of the following to facilitate evaluation:

(1) Expected Results, Benefits, Outputs, and Outcomes: Under this criterion applicants would articulate the results expected to be achieved during the workshop (outputs) and the benefits of the results (outcomes). Applicants should discuss the public interest values and environmental benefits the proposed workshop will provide to the non-Federal scientific community and how the topics presented meet the needs of a broad range of stakeholders. Applicants must also concisely describe how progress toward achieving the outputs/outcomes will be tracked and measured. (5%)
(2) Environmental Results Past Performance Criterion: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent and quality to which they adequately documented and/or reported on their progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outcomes and outputs) under Federal agency assistance agreements performed within the last three years, and if such progress was not being made whether the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. Note: In evaluating applicants under this factor, EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting history will receive a neutral score for this factor.(5%)
(3) Programmatic Capability: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on their ability to successfully complete and manage the proposed project taking into account the following factors: (i) its past performance in successfully completing and managing federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years, (ii) its history of meeting reporting requirements under federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years and submitting acceptable final technical reports under those agreements, (iii) its organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project, and (iv) its staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed project. Note: In evaluating applicants under this criterion, the Agency will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance or reporting history (items i and ii above), will receive a neutral score for those elements of this criterion. (10%)
(4) Uniqueness of Topic: The extent to which the information presented is likely to address key methodological issues of importance to the environmental economics research community. The applicant will be judged on the degree to which the topic selected represents a unique, complex or novel methodological issue for which more information or training will further understanding of public policy. (35%)
(5) Cost-effectiveness: Applicants will be judged by the absence of similar workshop topics and the reasonableness of the projected costs of the workshop. (20%)
(6) Design and Effectiveness: Applicants will be judged on the likely success of the proposed workshops for furthering understanding of the topic. Applicants will be judged on the workshop format, quality of instructors, methods for selecting participants, and means of disseminating information (25%).

3. Current Issues Workshops: Applications under this subject will be evaluated against the following technical criteria. If more than one workshop is included in the proposal, each individual proposed workshop will be evaluated separately where included in the same proposal from the same applicant. The importance of the criteria is indicated in percentage terms in parentheses after each criterion, and applicants are advised that their Initial Proposals should explicitly address each of the following to facilitate evaluation:

(1) Expected Results, Benefits, Outputs, and Outcomes: Under this criterion applicants would articulate the results expected to be achieved during the workshop (outputs) and the benefits of the results (outcomes). Applicants should discuss the public interest values and environmental benefits the proposed workshop will provide to the non-Federal scientific community and how the topics presented meet the needs of a broad range of stakeholders. Applicants must also concisely describe how progress toward achieving the outputs/outcomes will be tracked and measured. (5%)
(2) Environmental Results Past Performance Criterion: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent and quality to which they adequately documented and/or reported on their progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outcomes and outputs) under Federal agency assistance agreements performed within the last three years, and if such progress was not being made whether the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. Note: In evaluating applicants under this factor, EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting history will receive a neutral score for this factor. (5%)
(3) Programmatic Capability: Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on their ability to successfully complete and manage the proposed project taking into account the following factors: (i) its past performance in successfully completing and managing federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years, (ii) its history of meeting reporting requirements under federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years and submitting acceptable final technical reports under those agreements, (iii) its organizational experience and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the proposed project, and (iv) its staff expertise/qualifications, staff knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals of the proposed project. Note: In evaluating applicants under this criterion, the Agency will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance or reporting history (items i and ii above), will receive a neutral score for those elements of this criterion. (10%)
(4) Cost-effectiveness: Applicants will be judged by the absence of similar workshop topics and the reasonableness of the projected costs of the workshop. (20%)
(5) Credibility: Applicants will be evaluated based on the likely credibility of the resulting research in identifying policy relevant issues. This will be judged partly on the professional standing and demonstrated success of the organization in hosting workshops (30%).
(6) Relevance: Applicants will be evaluated on the relevance and usefulness of the proposed research topic to solving important environmental problems and whether the workshop design, or format, assures lively interest and interaction. (30%)

NOTE ON THE EVALUATION OF AN APPLICANT’S PROPOSED SUBAWARDEES AND/OR CONTRACTORS:

The evaluation criteria that will be used by EPA to review applications for all three Workshop subjects is described above. During this evaluation, except for those criteria that relate to the applicant's own qualifications, past performance, and reporting history, the review panel will consider, as appropriate and relevant, the qualifications, expertise, and experience of:

1. An applicant's proposed subawardees/subgrantees identified in the application if the applicant demonstrates in the application that subaward/subgrant will be properly awarded consistent with the applicable regulations in 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31. For example, applicants must not use subawards/subgrants to obtain commercial services or products from for profit firms or individual consultants.

2. An applicant's named contractor(s), including consultants, identified in the application if the applicant demonstrates in its application that the contractor(s) was selected in compliance with the competitive Procurement Standards in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR 31.36 as appropriate. For example, an applicant must demonstrate that it selected the contractor(s) competitively or that a proper non-competitive sole-source award consistent with the regulations will be made to the contractor(s), that efforts were made to provide small and disadvantaged businesses with opportunities to compete, and that some form of cost or price analysis was conducted. EPA may not accept sole source justifications for contracts for services or products that are otherwise readily available in the commercial marketplace.

EPA will not consider the qualifications, experience, and expertise of proposed subawardees /subgrantees and/or contractors during the evaluation process unless the applicant complies with these requirements.

B. Selection Process
Each eligible Initial Proposal will be evaluated and ranked by a panel composed of EPA or other Federal representatives selected to judge each area. The reviewers will base their evaluation on the criteria listed in Section V(A) . The review panel’s rankings will be based on averaging the individual rankings of each reviewer, after panel discussions regarding their initial rankings. The reviews will be conducted in a manner that provides for separate rankings of proposals submitted for each of the three Workshop subject areas. The review panel will recommend the applications with the highest evaluated numerical scores in each of the three Workshop subject areas to the EPA Approving Official for consideration of funding. Final funding decisions will be made by the EPA Approving Official. NCEE may ask applicants whose Initial Proposals receive a favorable review to modify their work plans or budgets before making final funding recommendations. Applicants will not be asked or permitted to make any changes to their work plans/budgets that would affect the basis upon which the application (or portions of the application) was recommended or selected for funding. EPA expects to identify and notify final contending applicants regarding the need for complete applications within eight weeks of the closing of this solicitation. Final contending applicants will then have approximately four to six weeks to complete and submit a full assistance agreement application ion.

Section VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Award Notices
Applicants will be notified by e-mail about evaluation decisions and the prospect of a grant award based upon the outcome of the review and recommendation of the Approving Official. A summary statement of the scientific review by the review panel will be provided to each applicant upon request Applicants recommended for funding will be required to submit additional certifications and an electronic version of the revised project abstract. They may also be asked to provide responses to comments or suggestions offered by the peer reviewers, a revised budget, and/or to resubmit their application. EPA Project Officers will contact Principal Investigators to obtain these materials.

Non-profit applicants that are recommended for funding under this announcement are subject to pre-award administrative capability reviews consistent with Section 8b, 8c and 9d. of EPA Order 5700.8 - Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards ( http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700_8.pdf (9 pp, 31 K)). In addition, non-profit applicants that qualify for funding may depending on the size of the award, be required to fill out and submit to the Grants Management Office the Administrative Capabilities Form with supporting documents contained in Appendix A of EPA Order 5700.8.

The official notification of an award will be made by the Agency’s Grants and Interagency Agreement Management Division. Applicants are cautioned that only a grants officer is authorized to bind the Government to the expenditure of funds; a preliminary selection does not guarantee an award.

Upon receipt and processing of the formal grant applications, EPA will announce recipients through the posting of information on NCEE’s website, http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/Grants.html .

This information will be posted approximately 30 days after EPA’s Grants Administration Division issues a written offer of award to each recipient. EPA expects to announce successful awards no later than September 2008.

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
Applicants must comply with standard EPA assistance agreement requirements. Funded activities must be allowable under EPA statutory authority (see Section III, Eligibility Information ). Expectations and responsibilities of grantees and cooperative agreement holders are summarized in this section, although the terms grant and grantee are used. See http://www.epa.gov/ncer/guidance for the full terms and conditions associated with an award, including which activities require prior approval from the EPA.

1. Meetings: Conference organizers will be expected to budget for, and participate in, all planning meetings with other organizers to provide conference planning updates, address outstanding planning issues and to discuss the proceedings document.

2. Approval of Changes after Award: Prior written approval is required from the EPA if there will be a significant change from the work described in the application. Examples of these changes are contained in 40 C.F.R. 30.25. Note: Prior written approval is also required from the EPA for incurring costs more than 90 calendar days prior to award.

3. Reporting: EPA is waiving the final technical report requirement as authorized by 40 CFR 30.51 (c). However, a grant recipient must agree to provide a proceedings document that will be provided to the EPA Project Officer, and materials received will be eligible for inclusion on an NCEE website.

A grant recipient must also agree to provide copies of any peer reviewed journal article(s) resulting from the conference during the project period. In addition, the recipient should notify the EPA Project Officer of any papers published after completion of the grant that were based on research supported by the grant.

4. Acknowledgement of EPA Support: EPA’s full or partial support must be acknowledged in the proceedings document, journal articles, oral or poster presentations, news releases, interviews with reporters and other communications. Any documents developed under this agreement that are intended for distribution to the public or inclusion in a scientific, technical, or other journal shall include the following statement:

This proceedings document [or article] was developed under Assistance Agreement No. (“assigned upon issuance by EPA’s Office of Grants and Debarment”) awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It has not been formally reviewed by the EPA. The views expressed in this document are solely those of [name of recipient] and the EPA does not endorse any products or commercial services mentioned in this publication.

C. Reporting
The recipient of these financial awards will be subject to post award monitoring by a designated EPA Project Officer. A Project Officer will be designated at the time of award of the assistance agreements. To comply with standard EPA post award monitoring requirements, the recipient must submit progress reports quarterly, and participate in an annual review of the project with the EPA Project Officer. Annual reviews may take place on or off-site. Quarterly progress reports detail the project status, tasks completed during the reporting period, compliance with the workplan, anticipated goals and tasks for the upcoming quarter, expenditures, and remaining grant funds.
During annual reviews, the designated EPA Project Officer will evaluate the progress of the grantee in completing tasks detailed in the workplan, ensure that the grantee is meeting all programmatic requirements, and spending federal funds on allowable activities under the grant or cooperative agreement.

In addition to the required quarterly progress reports recipients must submit proceedings for any conferences suitable for posting on the NCEE Website as well as copies of any technical reports. The final report should provide a complete description of all results achieved. The draft final report will be due 90 days prior to the end of the assistance agreement. After reviewing the Project Officer’s comments, the grantee will prepare a final report, which will be due at the end of the assistance agreement.

D. Disputes
Assistance agreement competition-related disputes will be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures published in 70 FR (Federal Register) 3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/resolution.htm . Copies of these procedures may also be requested through the Agency contact listed in Section VII.

E. Nonprofit Administrative Capability Clause

Nonprofit applicants that are recommended for funding under this announcement are subject to pre-award administrative capability reviews consistent with Sections 8.b, 8.c, and 9.d of EPA Order 5700.8, ‘EPA Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards’ which can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700_8.pdf. In addition, non-profit applicants that qualify for funding may, depending on the size of the award, be required to fill out and submit to the Grants Management Office the Administrative Capability Form, with supporting documents, contained in Appendix A of EPA Order 5700.8.

F. Human Subjects
A grant recipient must agree to meet all EPA requirements for studies using human subjects prior to implementing any work with these subjects. These requirements are given in 40 C.F.R. 26, referred to as the "Common Rule." No work involving human subjects, including recruiting, may be initiated before the EPA has received a copy of the applicant's Institutional Review Board's (IRB) approval of the project and the EPA has also provided approval. Where human subjects are involved in the research, the recipient must provide evidence of subsequent IRB reviews, including amendments or minor changes of protocol, as part of annual reports.

G. Public Access and Information Release
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 has been revised to provide public access to research data through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under some circumstances. Data that are (1) first produced in a project that is supported in whole or in part with Federal funds and (2) cited publicly and officially by a Federal agency in support of an action that has the force and effect of law (i.e., a regulation) may be accessed through FOIA. If such data are requested by the public, the EPA must ask for it, and the grantee must submit it, in accordance with A-110 and EPA regulations at 40 C.F.R. 30.36.

Section VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Applicants with questions about this solicitation should e-mail their questions to NCEE@epa.gov , using “Grant Solicitation Question” as the subject. Questions will not be replied to directly. Instead, we will respond to all appropriate questions by posting answers on our website on the frequently asked questions (FAQ) page, http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/GrantsFAQ.html . We will acknowledge receipt of e-mail questions within two business days, indicating whether a response will be posted on our FAQ page. Questions submitted in other ways will result in a request to resubmit them by e-mail.

Questions should be submitted as early as possible. Only questions posed to us by eight days (March 16, 2008) before the closing date (March 24, 2008) will be considered, and no changes will be made to the FAQ page after six days prior (March 18, 2008) to the closing date of the solicitation (March 24, 2008).

In accordance with EPA's Assistance Agreement Competition Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual applicants to discuss draft applications, provide informal comments on draft applications, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to ranking criteria. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their applications. However, consistent with the provisions in the announcement, EPA will respond to questions from individual applicants regarding threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the submission of the application, and requests for clarification about the announcement. Please do not contact other individual EPA staff with questions. This is to ensure that all applicants are given equal access to solicitation information. NCEE’s point of contact for this solicitation is: Clay Ogg, phone: 202-566-2315, E-mail: ogg.clay@epa.gov

An email will be sent by NCEE to the Principal Investigator and the Administrative Contact to acknowledge receipt of the application and transmit other important information. If you do not receive an email acknowledgment within 14 days of the submission closing date, immediately contact the Technical Contact listed under “Agency Contacts” in this solicitation. See “Submission Instructions for Electronic Applications” for additional information regarding acknowledgment of receipt of electronically submitted applications.


Section VIII. OTHER INFORMATION

A brief overview of assistance agreements NCEE has awarded over the last few years is available at:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/Webpages/Grants.html

Local Navigation

• NCEE Home
• Publications
• Careers & Internships
• Grants & Funding
• Events
• Internet Links
• About NCEE

• EPA Home
• Privacy and Security Notice
• Contact Us