Jump to main content.

Pre-Application

Objectives

1. Develop a basic understanding of the competition process and where to go to get help in interpreting EPA Order 5700.5A1 on Assistance Agreement Competition.

2. Understand the different types of pre-application assistance that can be provided to applicants in both competitive and non-competitive/unsolicited situations.

3. Understand the basic components of a competitive announcement.

This section provides general guidance for preparing and developing announcements and conducting competitions. Questions about EPA Order 5700.5A1 on Assistance Competition should be referred to your Junior Resource Official (JRO), Office of General Counsel/Office of Regional Counsel (OGC/ORGC) attorneys or the Competition Advocate located in the Office of Assistance agreement and Debarment.

SUMMARY OF EPA ASSISTANT AGREEMENT COMPETITION PROCESS

EPA Order 5700.5A1, Policy for Competition in Assistance Agreements, which became effective on January 15, 2005, establishes EPA policy for competition in the award of EPA assistance agreements subject to the policy. The competition process is conducted in compliance with the requirements of the Order and implementing guidance. The Order replaces the original competition policy which went into effect on October 4, 2002. A summary of the assistance agreement competition process is set forth below.

1. Competition planning: Program offices are encouraged to begin the assistance agreement competition process by establishing a competition schedule for the announcement, competition, and award of assistance agreement. During the planning process, program offices should also determine the method of competition that will be used (simplified or open), develop the evaluation criteria against which proposals will be evaluated, and address other issues that may affect the competition (e.g., eligibility).

2. Preparation of the announcement: All competitive announcements must be prepared, structured, and organized in accordance with the OMB required format for competitive announcements. This ensures government-wide consistency on the format and content of announcements for funding opportunities.

3. Posting of the announcement: Competitive announcements are typically posted on publicly available agency program office websites. In some cases, if required, they are published in the Federal Register.

4. Synopsis of announcement on grants.gov: A synopsis of the competitive announcement is posted on grants.gov as required by OMB. Grants.gov is the website designated by OMB for the posting of synopses of competitive funding opportunities. The purpose of the synopsis is to provide potential applicants with sufficient information to enable them to decide whether they are interested in viewing the full announcement and competing for the funding opportunity. All Federal agencies are required to post synopses of announcements at fedassistance agreement.gov. The synopsis is posted with URL links through which the full announcement can be obtained.

5. Submission of applications/proposals: Applicants submit applications/proposals to EPA in accordance with the terms, conditions, and requirements set forth in the announcement. As of October 1, 2005 all announcements must have available the option for electronic submission of applications to EPA.

6. Evaluation of applications/proposals. Applications/proposals are reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the terms, conditions, criteria, and ranking factors set forth in the announcement. Program offices are responsible for conducting the evaluations. The evaluation process must be designed to result in a fair and objective review of the applications/proposals in accordance with the stated criteria in the announcement.

7. Ranking/Recommendation Lists: The evaluation process generally results in the development of a ranking/recommended list of the applicants by the program offices.

8. Selection: Generally, an approval official from the program office reviews the ranking/recommended list and determines which applicants to recommend for award. The recommendation is made in the funding recommendation sent to the award official.

9. Award: The award official reviews the funding recommendation, resolves any issues affecting the award, and then issues an award agreement to the applicant.

10. Disputes: Unsuccessful applicants may question an award decision by filing a dispute with a Grants Competition Dispute Decision Official. Disputes are resolved in accordance with Appendix A of the Order.

11. Amendments: EPA's assistance agreement competition policy sets forth the requirements governing the competition of amendments to grant awards.

The Announcement

The purpose of the announcement is to communicate EPA's interests and priorities to potential applicants. The PO develops and administers an announcement by:

The announcement process typically consists of seven steps.

1. Plan What Is To Be Accomplished

Planning consists of deciding:

  • If funds are available
  • What type of extramural vehicle should be used
  • If requirement is subject to the Competition Policy

Your office may require a Announcement Plan describing the key elements of the process, including such things as how to:

  • Obtain approval
  • Advertise
  • Conduct reviews

Consult the appropriate officials in your office early in the process to see if an Announcement Plan is required or recommended.

See Chapter 2 for details on selecting the appropriate extramural vehicle.

2. Decide on the Key Elements to Address

Below is a summary of OMB's Standard Format for Agency Announcements of Funding Opportunities. This is the required format for all competitive announcements. All competitive assistance announcements must be structured and organized in conformance with the OMB required format. This includes announcements or notices of competitive opportunities that are published in the FEDERAL REGISTER. Please consult the OMB Federal register notice for more detailed information.

Office of Federal Financial Management; Policy Directive on Financial Assistance Program Announcements; Standard Data Elements and Government-Wide Guidance for Electronically Posting Synopses at Assistance agreement.gov FIND; Notices (June 23, 2003) (193k)

Overview Information

A. Required Overview Content

1. Federal Agency Name(s), including name of funding sponsor
2. Funding Opportunity Title
3. Announcement Type (e.g., initial announcement or modification of a previous announcement)
4. Funding Opportunity Number
5. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s)
6. Dates (include all dates that applicants will need to know)

B. Optional, Additional Overview Content

1. Present optional info in a sequential order that parallels the full text format
2. Examples of optional info include
a. Concise description of funding opportunity
b. Total amount to be awarded
c. Anticipated amounts and/or number of individual awards
d. Types of instruments that may be awarded
e. Who is eligible to apply?
f. Whether cost sharing is required
g. Any limitations of the number of applications that each applicant may submit
h. Where one can get application materials

C. Method of Presentation

1. Executive summary (must appear before the full text)
2. Cover and/or inside cover
3. Federal Register format (must display the required overview information in a single location preceding the full text of the announcement)

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description - Required

(Full programmatic description of the funding opportunity; also indicate if the grant relates to geospatial information or activities)

II. Award Information - Required

A. Must indicate type of instrument to be awarded. Grant or Cooperative Agreement
B. Must include estimate total amount of funding expected to be awarded under the announcement
C. Must include a statement either here or in section III that EPA reserves the right to reject all applications/proposals and make no awards

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants - Required
B. Cost Sharing or Matching - Required
C. Other Eligibility Criteria - Required, if applicable
D. Include all threshold eligibility criteria and the consequences of not meeting them

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address to Request Application Package - Required
B. Content and Form of Application Submission - Required
C. Submission Dates and Times - Required
D. Intergovernmental Review - Required, if applicable
E. Funding Restrictions - Required
F. Other Submission Requirements - Required
G. Information on how late proposals will be handled

V. Application Review Information

A. Evaluation criteria - Required; include any criteria required by law, regulation, or policy (e.g. environmental results, pre-award, programmatic capacity)
B. Weights of criteria if they vary in importance
C. If there are specific sub-factors under a criterion say so and give weights to them
D. Other selection factors (e.g. programmatic considerations)
E. Describe Review and Selection Process
F. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates - Optional

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award Notices - Required
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements - Required
C. Reporting - Required
D. Disputes procedures

VII. Agency Contact(s)

VIII. Other Information - Optional

(Any additional information that will assist a potential applicant)

Additionally, under Section 9 of the Pre-award Order, competitive announcements issued on or after March 31, 2005 under which non-profit applicants may compete must:

1. Include a programmatic capability ranking factor(s) in Section V of the announcement for evaluating applicants (non-profits and other than non-profit applicants). Section 7 of the Order describes the elements of programmatic capability to be evaluated under the announcement and Section 9.b addresses how the programmatic capability ranking factor should be used in RFIPs and RFAs.

2. Require applicants to submit information relating to their programmatic capability-see 9b and 9c of the Order.

3. Include a statement in Section IV that in evaluating an applicant for programmatic capability purposes, EPA will consider information provided by the applicant in the application/proposal and may consider information from other sources including agency files.

4. Include a statement in Section VI that non-profit applicants that are recommended for funding will be subject to pre-award administrative capability reviews consistent with paragraphs 8.b, 8.c, and 9.d of EPA Order 5700.8.

Please ensure that the following language is included in section IV or VIII of competitive announcements.

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

Some questions have been raised regarding the disputes language that must be included in Section VI of announcements. This is the language we recommended with a link to the procedures.

" 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://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm. Copies of these procedures may also be requested by contacting......at..."

The question is who should be identified as the contact point if someone wants to request a copy of the procedures. The Competition Advocates suggestion would be that the same person who is identified as the contact point for questions related to the announcement in Section VII be the person identified above to request a copy of the procedures from.

3. Outline the Evaluation Process

The process of evaluating proposals consists of several reviews: review of threshold eligibility factors, review of ranking factors and review of any other stated criteria. These reviews are discussed in Chapter 4. When your office requires a review plan, it should be developed simultaneously with the announcement because the announcement will include a description of the review process, including the criteria that will be used to evaluate the applications.

4. Write the Announcement

A well-written announcement clarifies what will be funded and what is expected from the applicant. The PO, with support from technical and administrative staff, generally writes it.

5. Obtain Approvals

Your office may have specific approval requirements that you must obtain prior to issuing an announcement. For example, ORD "Policy and Procedures Manual" requires that their Extramural Management Specialists review the elements included in a RFA.

Policy on the Review and Announcement of Discretionary Grants

On April 5, 2005, the Administrator issued a new policy on the review and announcement of discretionary grants. The policy establishes a certification process for certain discretionary grant programs and a new system for announcing grant awards.

Certification Process for Discretionary Grant Programs

Attachment 2 of the Order is a list of grant programs subject to the certification process. OGD will update this list as necessary to reflect new programs published in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. Excluded from the list are State programs awarded on the basis of an allocation formula prescribed by statute, regulation or legally-binding program guidance, related Tribal programs, and a number of other programs that did not implicate the areas of concern described in the policy. The Policy does not exclude Congressionally-directed programs (e.g., the Great Lakes program), since the Agency retains considerable discretion under these programs to decide who will receive grants and/or to negotiate and approve grant workplans.
For the grant programs covered by the new policy, certifications will be required for two categories of actions. The first category is all non-competitive awards and out-of-scope monetary increase amendments based on funding recommendations/packages submitted to a Grants Management Office on or after April 30, 2005, except for awards/amendments for specific Congressional earmark projects to identified recipients (e.g., an earmarked grant to a particular community for construction of a wastewater treatment plant). The second category is all competitive funding announcements issued on or after April 30, 2005. Attachments 3 and 4 contain certification procedures and sample certifications for these actions.

The policy presumes that ordinarily the Assistant Administrator or Regional Administrator will provide the necessary certifications. While they may delegate this responsibility to the Deputy Assistant Administrator or Deputy Regional Administrator level, they will be accountable for the certifications submitted by the office.

Attachments to the Policy

  • Attachment 1: Review and Announcement of Discretionary Grants (pdf 69kb)
  • Attachment 2: Discretionary Grant Programs Subject to Internal Review (pdf 9kb)
  • Attachment 3: Non-Competitive Certifications Final
  • Attachment 4: Competitive Announcement Certifications Final
  • Attachment 5: Grant Activity Report Format Final (two formats)
    • WordPerfect
    • Acrobat (Form Fillable) (pdf 18kb)

In addition, the competition order requires that certain announcements be reviewed by the Grants Competition Advocate and OGC/ORC before issuance.

6. Advertise the RFA

  • Attachment 1: Review and Announcement of Discretionary Grants (pdf 69kb)
  • Attachment 2: Discretionary Grant Programs Subject to Internal Review (pdf 9kb)
  • Attachment 3: Non-Competitive Certifications Final
  • Attachment 4: Competitive Announcement Certifications Final
  • Attachment 5: Grant Activity Report Format Final (two formats)
    • WordPerfect
    • Acrobat (Form Fillable) (pdf 18kb)

In addition, the competition order requires that certain announcements be reviewed by the Grants Competition Advocate and OGC/ORC before issuance.

7. Prepare for Screening and Log-In of Proposals

This screening and log-in step is part of the administrative review discussed in Chapter 4. The PO establishes the process before issuing the announcement to avoid confusion when the applications arrive.

Applications

When developing an announcement, the PO decides whether to issue a request for initial proposals (RFIP) or a request for full applications (RFA). However, it is mandatory that the RFIP or RFA be synopsized and posted on grants.gov. These are described in Section V of the competition order.

While EPA has no policy on when to use a RFIP or RFA, your local office or division may.

The following guidelines may help in the decision:

RFIPs are useful in situations when you:

  • Want to screen projects for relevant project/research objectives
  • Want to reduce paperwork
  • Anticipate a large response to a announcement
  • Want to let applicants assemble the application quickly and for little money

But, RFIPs may not be useful because they:

  • Can add time to the competition process
  • May not show reviewers which applications have the most merit
  • May have to go through the same review process as full applications. You might need two reviews for the same announcement.
  • May add to the cost for both the selected applicants and EPA since the applicant goes through the writing process twice and EPA goes through the review process twice.

Announcing the RFA

To reach the widest possible audience, the program can publicize the announcement by using one or more of the following in addition to posting the announcement on the program office website or in the FEDERAL REGISTER (if required) and synopsizing the announcement on fedassistance agreement.gov:

*Since the FR, scientific journals, and some Internet sites require payment, you must get prior approval for a Purchase Order or Bankcard Purchase. Otherwise you may have to process an unauthorized procurement request or pay for the advertising yourself.

To ensure fairness, you should establish an issue date and wait until that date before issuing the RFA to anyone.

Communicating with Potential Applicants Pre-Application Assistance

EPA officials must deal with all potential applicants on an equal basis.

Pre-application assistance avoids delays caused by submission of incomplete or ineligible applications; helps determine eligibility early in the competitive process; helps determine how well the project fits program guidance and objectives; discourages inappropriate proposals; and helps prevent the need to rework inappropriately or incorrectly prepared applications.

If provided, program and regional offices must make the opportunity for pre-application assistance available on an equal basis to all potential applicants. Information and assistance may not be provided to a particular applicant or interested person, unless the opportunity to obtain such information and assistance is available to all parties. All potential applicants must be informed of the opportunity for pre-application assistance in the announcement, and program offices must describe how the assistance will be provided. When informing applicants of the availability of pre-application assistance, program and regional offices must ensure that applicants understand that they are responsible for the content of their applications and that receiving information and assistance from EPA does not guarantee funding.

Program and regional offices may use a variety of techniques to provide pre-application assistance. Assistance may be made available through questions and answers posted on web sites, open meetings, conference calls, electronic mail groups, and/or in response to written or telephonic requests made by individual applicants. Programs and regions must also consider the need to ensure that applicants from remote areas have an opportunity to obtain pre-application assistance without traveling to Headquarters or a regional or satellite EPA facility. If program or regional offices cannot provide all applicants with a reasonable opportunity to obtain pre-application assistance, then pre-application assistance is not appropriate.

Program and regional offices may provide pre-application assistance to help potential applicants determine whether the applicant itself or the applicant's proposed project is eligible for funding early in the competitive process. Agency personnel may advise applicants as to whether an applicant or proposed activity is eligible for funding on the basis of criteria in the announcement and may respond to requests for clarification of the announcement.

Agency employees may not provide advice or assistance that will give particular applicants a competitive advantage. For example, Agency employees must not:

1) Prepare an application for an individual or organization;
2) share ideas gleaned from one application with another applicant;
3) review and comment on draft applications; or
4) provide additional information on or clarification of the Agency's approach to evaluating and ranking applications that is not available to all applicants in the announcement.

The project officer and/or the assistance agreement management officer may assist applicants by answering their questions on eligibility requirements for the proposed project or the process itself. They may also assist prospective applicants with administrative issues, such as identifying the information that must be submitted in an acceptable application, for example, the required certifications, budget justifications and cost allowability under OMB Circulars. If you tell one you must tell all so post your answers to questions on your predetermined media.

Recommendations for communicating with potential applicants include:

Amending the Announcement

Sometimes announcements must be amended after being issued (e.g., a change in priorities or funding, a clarification in response to a question raised by an applicant). When issuing amendments, the following guidelines are helpful:

GUIDANCE ON UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS

An unsolicited proposal is a written application for assistance agreement funding that is not prompted by either an official Agency announcement or an explicit or implicit request by an EPA employee that the applicant submit the proposal. The unique or innovative ideas contained in the proposal must be the applicant's not EPA's. The proposal must include sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of the technical merit, program value or accomplishment of a public purpose and to decide on the merits of funding the proposed effort. If the Agency requests additional information or clarification from the applicant after receiving an unsolicited proposal, it does not make the proposal solicited.

Agency personnel attending conferences, meetings, and similar events may provide general information regarding EPA's mission, programs and initiatives to organizations that may have an interest in applying for EPA assistance agreements. Agency personnel may also respond to questions regarding overall EPA funding priorities at such events or in other settings (e.g., in response to telephone calls or E-Mails). However, Agency personnel should not encourage or authorize the potential applicant to perform any work in anticipation of receiving an assistance agreement.

The fact that an individual who has received general information from an EPA employee subsequently submits a proposal based on that information does not, in and of itself, make the proposal solicited. If the circumstances indicate that the applicant rather than EPA initiated the proposal, then it may still qualify as unsolicited.
The unsolicited proposal exception also requires that the proposal be unique or innovative and not resemble the substance of any pending or contemplated competitive announcement. An unsolicited proposal generally cannot be used to justify the ongoing non-competitive funding of a project. For example, if the project period for an assistance agreement is about to expire and the recipient submits an unsolicited proposal requesting that EPA continue to fund either the same or a similar project, the "unique or innovative" test cannot be met.
Effective and fair implementation of the competition policy depends on the professional integrity of EPA personnel.

BOILER-PLATE ANNOUNCEMENT PROVISIONS

As stated in Section 8.d of the Assistance Agreement Competition Policy, Program Office's are responsible for ensuring that announcements are prepared in the required OMB format and in compliance with all applicable Agency policies including the Assistance Agreement Competition Policy, Environmental Results Policy, and Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards. The purpose of the attached checklist is to assist Program Office's in ensuring that competitive assistance agreement announcements contain certain provisions required by these EPA policies. This is not a checklist of all of the items or provisions required to be included in competitive announcements; it is just a checklist of certain items required under the policies identified above.
Program Office's should refer to the checklist when developing announcements to ensure that certain required information is included in the announcement before it is sent to Janice Lee of the Grants Competition Advocate's office for posting on grants.gov. This will facilitate the process of timely posting the announcement on grants.gov and minimize the need to possibly have to modify the announcement. Announcements that do not contain such information will be returned to the Program Office and will not be posted on grants.gov until they are modified appropriately; this delays and disrupts the competitive process because the Program Office must prepare and issue a modified announcement and then send it back for posting.

ANNOUNCEMENT CHECKLIST FOR SELECTED PROVISIONS

Section I, Funding Opportunity Description

1. Section I of the announcement must describe the linkage between the work intended to be accomplished under the agreement and EPA's Strategic Plan/GPRA Architecture (See Section 6.a of EPA Order 5700.7).

2. Section I of the announcement must contain a concise discussion of expected outputs and outcomes (See Section 6.a of EPA Order 5700.7).

Section IV, Application and Submission Information

1. Section IV must require applicants to submit a plan for tracking and measuring their progress toward achieving the expected environmental outputs/outcomes identified in Section I of the announcement.

2. Section IV (or VIII) must include the following provision regarding Confidential Business Information.
In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a portion of their application/proposal as confidential business information. EPA will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2. Applicants must clearly mark applications/proposals or portions of applications/proposals they claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, EPA is not required to make the inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by 40 CFR 2.204(c) (2) prior to disclosure.

3. If the competition is open to non-profit applicants, then see "a" and "b" below.

a. Section IV must include a provision requiring applicants to submit information in their proposal/application relating to their programmatic capability to perform the project (See Sections 9.b and 9.c of EPA Order 5700.8).

b. Section IV must also include a provision stating that in evaluating applicants for programmatic capability purposes, EPA will consider information provided by the applicant in their application/proposal as well as information from other sources including agency files (See Section 9.c of EPA Order 5700.8)
Section V, Application Review Information

1. Section V must include ranking criteria for evaluating the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its progress toward achieving the expected outputs/outcomes identified in Section I of the announcement (See Section 6.b of EPA Order 5700.7).

2. For competitions under which non-profit organizations can compete for awards, Section V must include ranking criteria for evaluating applicants on their ability to demonstrate their programmatic capability to successfully carry out the proposed project (See Sections 7.b and 9.a of EPA Order 5700.8.

Section VI, Award Administration Information

1. Section VI must include the following Dispute Resolution provision.

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://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm.

Copies of these procedures may also be requested by contacting....at....
Note: The point of contact for requesting copies of the dispute procedures should be the same person identified as a "contact" in Section VII of the announcement.

2. If the competition may result in an award to a non-profit organization, Section VI must state that nonprofit applicants that are recommended for funding will be subject to pre-award administrative capability reviews consistent with Sections 8.b, 8.c, and 9.d of EPA Order 5700.8.

EPA Order 5700.8, "EPA Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards". This Order went into effect March 31, 2005. The Order responds to Congressional, GAO and OIG concerns that: 1) EPA is awarding grants to non-profit organizations that lack administrative and/or programmatic capability; and 2) EPA is not taking corrective action against non-profit organizations that fail to comply with the terms and conditions of their grant agreements. The Order includes the following major provisions.

1. Programmatic Pre-Award Reviews for Non-Competitive Awards: Program Offices must assess the programmatic capability of the non-profit applicant, taking into account pertinent information from the Grantee Compliance Database and the grant application, and provide an assurance in the funding recommendation/funding package that the applicant possesses, or will possess, the necessary programmatic capability.

2. Administrative Pre-Award Reviews for new Non-Competitive Awards where the federal share exceeds $200,000: Non-profit applicants must complete an administrative capability questionnaire which Grants Management Offices (GMOs) will review. Applicants found to have the necessary administrative capability will be certified for four years. During that period, no additional 'questionnaire' reviews are necessary unless there is adverse performance information in the Grantee Compliance Database.

3. Administrative Pre-Award Reviews for other Funding Actions: GMOs must review the Grantee Compliance Database for capability information.

4. Competitive Grants: All competitive grant announcements under which non-profit organizations can compete must contain a programmatic capability ranking factor(s). Non-profit applicants and other applicants that compete will be evaluated under this factor. Non-profit applicants selected for funding will be subject to a review for administrative capability similar to that for non-competitive awards.

5. Where GMOs identify administrative capability weaknesses, non-profit awards generally cannot be made until the applicant has taken satisfactory corrective action. In exigent circumstances, EPA can make the award with special conditions prohibiting the applicant from drawing down grant funds pending corrective action.

6. Post-Award Non-Compliance: Award officials must take available remedies under grant regulations when non-profit recipients are in material non-compliance with grant terms and conditions. GMOs and Program Offices must also notify the OIG and the Suspension and Debarment Division if they have concerns over the integrity of a non-profit applicant or recipient.

7. The Order applies to Congressional earmarks, but requires advance consultation with the Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.

Cost Match/Share/Participation as a Threshold Eligibility Criteria or Ranking Criteria

In Competitive Announcements

Program Offices have asked whether they could impose a cost match/share/participation as threshold eligibility criteria in a competitive announcement in cases where a cost match/share/participation was not required by statute or regulation. Alternatively, some offices want to include ranking criteria in Section V of announcements to evaluate applicants on cost-type considerations. Below is some general guidance for using cost match/share/participation as a threshold eligibility factor (when it is not required by statute/regulation), and for developing a cost-type ranking criteria.

1. Non-statutory/regulatory Cost Match/Share/Participation

Program Office's must state in Section III of the announcement whether there is a required cost sharing, matching or cost participation without which an application/proposal would be ineligible for award; if cost sharing/matching/participation is not required, Section III of the announcement must say so. Cost sharing, matching, or participation as an eligibility criterion includes requirements based on statute, regulation, or policy. The Office of General Counsel has stated that a Program Office could as a matter of policy impose a cost match/share/participation as a threshold eligibility factor in Section III of announcements even in the absence of a specific statutory/regulatory cost match/share/participation requirement.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) program description that applies to the competition must indicate whether there is a required statutory/regulatory cost share/match/participation requirement that will be stated in Section III of the announcement. Similarly, the CFDA description must provide notice of any policy based cost share/match/participation requirements. Accordingly, Program Offices that want to retain the ability to impose a policy based cost share/match/participation as a threshold eligibility requirement in an announcement (in the absence of a statutory/regulatory cost share/match/participation requirement) must ensure that the CFDA that applies to that announcement provides notice in the appropriate section that the office may include a policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in certain competitive announcements-if the CFDA does not include such notice then the office cannot impose a policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in the announcement. Moreover, as required by Section 14.b of the Assistance Agreement Competition Policy, the Program Office must obtain the Grants Competition Advocate's approval for including the policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in the CFDA because it amounts to a competition eligibility limitation.1

2. Cost leveraging as a Section V ranking criteria

If an applicant's proposed voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation will be considered during the review process (as opposed to being an eligibility criterion in Section III of the announcement), the announcement must specifically address how it will be evaluated. If cost sharing/matching/participation will not be considered in the evaluation, the announcement should say so, so that there is no ambiguity for potential applicants. Vague statements that voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation is encouraged are not useful and are not recommended. It is also important that the announcement be clear about any restrictions on the types of cost that are acceptable as voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation.

Below is a model Section V ranking criteria clause which can be used, or tailored as appropriate, if an office wants to consider cost leveraging factors during the evaluation process:

Leveraging. XXX points. Under this criteria, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent they demonstrate (i) how they will coordinate the use of EPA funding with other Federal and/or non Federal sources of funds to leverage additional resources to carry out the proposed project(s) and/or (ii) that EPA funding will compliment activities relevant to the proposed project(s) carried out by the applicant with other sources of funds or resources. 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 matches or cost shares. Other Federal grants may not be used as matches or cost shares without specific statutory authority (e.g. HUD's Community Development Block Grants)

Any form of proposed leveraging that is evaluated under a section V ranking criteria must be included in the application/proposal and the application/proposal must describe how the applicant will obtain the leveraged resources and what role EPA funding will play in the overall project.

Cost Match/Share/Participation as a Threshold Eligibility Criteria or Ranking Criteria In Competitive Announcements

Program Offices have asked whether they could impose a cost match/share/participation as a threshold eligibility criteria in a competitive announcement in cases where a cost match/share/participation was not required by statute or regulation. Alternatively, some offices want to include a ranking criteria in Section V of announcements to evaluate applicants on cost-type considerations. Below is some general guidance for using cost match/share/participation as a threshold eligibility factor (when it is not required by statute/regulation), and for developing a cost-type ranking criteria.

1. Non-statutory/regulatory Cost Match/Share/Participation

Program Office's must state in Section III of the announcement whether there is a required cost sharing, matching or cost participation without which an application/proposal would be ineligible for award; if cost sharing/matching/participation is not required, Section III of the announcement must say so. Cost sharing, matching, or participation as an eligibility criterion includes requirements based on statute, regulation, or policy. The Office of General Counsel has stated that a Program Office could as a matter of policy impose a cost match/share/participation as a threshold eligibility factor in Section III of announcements even in the absence of a specific statutory/regulatory cost match/share/participation requirement.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) program description that applies to the competition must indicate whether there is a required statutory/regulatory cost share/match/participation requirement that will be stated in Section III of the announcement. Similarly, the CFDA description must provide notice of any policy based cost share/match/participation requirements. Accordingly, Program Offices that want to retain the ability to impose a policy based cost share/match/participation as a threshold eligibility requirement in an announcement (in the absence of a statutory/regulatory cost share/match/participation requirement) must ensure that the CFDA that applies to that announcement provides notice in the appropriate section that the office may include a policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in certain competitive announcements-if the CFDA does not include such notice then the office cannot impose a policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in the announcement. Moreover, as required by Section 14.b of the Assistance Agreement Competition Policy, the Program Office must obtain the Grants Competition Advocate's approval for including the policy based cost share/match/participation requirement in the CFDA because it amounts to a competition eligibility limitation.1

2. Cost leveraging as a Section V ranking criteria

If an applicant's proposed voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation will be considered during the review process (as opposed to being an eligibility criterion in Section III of the announcement), the announcement must specifically address how it will be evaluated. If cost sharing/matching/participation will not be considered in the evaluation, the announcement should say so, so that there is no ambiguity for potential applicants. Vague statements that voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation is encouraged are not useful and are not recommended. It is also important that the announcement be clear about any restrictions on the types of cost that are acceptable as voluntary cost sharing/matching/participation.

Below is a model Section V ranking criteria clause which can be used, or tailored as appropriate, if an office wants to consider cost leveraging factors during the evaluation process:

Leveraging. XXX points. Under this criteria, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent they demonstrate (i) how they will coordinate the use of EPA funding with other Federal and/or non Federal sources of funds to leverage additional resources to carry out the proposed project(s) and/or (ii) that EPA funding will compliment activities relevant to the proposed project(s) carried out by the applicant with other sources of funds or resources. 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 matches or cost shares. Other Federal grants may not be used as matches or cost shares without specific statutory authority (e.g. HUD's Community Development Block Grants

Any form of proposed leveraging that is evaluated under a section V ranking criteria must be included in the application/proposal and the application/proposal must describe how the applicant will obtain the leveraged resources and what role EPA funding will play in the overall project.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CONSIDERATIONS IN GRANTS COMPETITION

Summary: Use of a racial preference in a grant competition involves significant litigation risk and defense would be costly in terms of resources and publicity. If you think a grants competition may involve a racial preference, call the Civil Rights Law Office (CRLO), OGC.

Detail: CRLO works with EPA program offices and GAD to help make the Agency's grant competitions legally compliant, in ways that achieve program goals as much as possible.

  • The Agency generally should not make selections on the basis of race. Except in certain very limited circumstances, this is considered to be unconstitutional.
  • The Agency also should not limit grant eligibility on the basis of race, although a grant solicitation may express an interest in minority applicants. Some examples of race-neutral eligibility criteria are:

    - Limited federal assistance
    - Economic disadvantage
    - Geography
    - Lack of exposure to environmental science/environmental information - Undeveloped environmental science infrastructure at educational institutions
    - Educational background
    - Experience

Note: Consider using Table B-15 of the National Science Foundation report, "Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions," to establish economic eligibility criteria for educational institutions and students. It sets forth the federal science and engineering funding that colleges and universities receive for research and development. It gives agencies a reference for setting a dollar cut-off - generally $15M - that will "capture" potential applicant schools and students that receive limited funding.

http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf03326/pdf/fssb15.pdf

  • The Agency may do some "targeted" dissemination of information about assistance in order to promote application by minorities, so long as non-minorities are well- represented in the applicant pool.
  • The legal guidelines on use of race apply to both minority-serving institutions and HBCUs, according to current DOJ guidance. MSIs are identified by their minority enrollment. HBCUs are identified, in part, by their mission of educating African-American students.
  • The Agency may show preference to federally recognized tribes and their members. Tribes are considered "political" rather than racial entities.

SUMMARY

At the beginning of this chapter, we identified several objectives you would accomplish by reading the chapter. The objectives are listed below, each followed by a brief summary of the key points the chapter covered.

1. Develop a basic understanding of the competitive process and where to go to get help in interpreting EPA Order 5700.5A1 on Assistance Agreement Competition. The competition process generally consists of a number of steps. These include planning, deciding on the key elements that need to be addressed in the program's announcement, outlining the evaluation process, writing the announcement, obtaining approvals, advertising the announcement and preparing for logging in and screening proposals. Questions about EPA Order 5700.5A1 on Assistance Agreement Competition should be referred to your JRO or the Competition Advocate located in the Office of Assistance agreement and Debarment.

2. Understand what type of pre-application assistance can be provided to potential applicants. Program and regional offices must make the opportunity for pre-application assistance available on an equal basis to all potential applicants of a competitive announcement. Information and assistance may not be provided to a particular applicant or interested person, unless the same opportunity to obtain such information and assistance is available to all parties.

3. Understand the basic components of an announcement. All competitive assistance announcements must be structured and organized in conformance with the OMB required format. This includes announcements or notices of competitive opportunities that are published in the FEDERAL REGISTER.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the purpose of an announcement?

2. Where would you find the required format for a competitive announcement?

3. What is the purpose of a well-written announcement?

4. Where must the announcement be posted?

5. Can an EPA employee assist an applicant in preparing a response to a RFA?

6. If no weights are attached to the evaluation criteria, how do you determine how much each one is worth?

7. What is the difference between "threshold" eligibility criteria and evaluation criteria?

| Chapter Summaries | Introduction | Planning Consideration | Pre-Application | Review/Selection | Funding/Award Phase | Post Award/Audit | Closeout | Official EPA Project File | Regulations | Contents | Glossary | Summaries | Return to the Grants and Debarment Home Page |

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.