PART 3405—HIGHER EDUCATION CHALLENGE GRANTS PROGRAM Authority: Sec. 1470, National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (7 U.S.C. 3316). Source: 62 FR 39317, July 22, 1997, unless otherwise noted. Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3405 appear at 76 FR 4808, Jan. 27, 2011. Subpart A—General Information § 3405.1 Applicability of regulations. (a) The regulations of this part only apply to competitive Higher Education Challenge Grants awarded under the provisions of section 1417(b)(1) of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, as amended (NARETPA)(7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(1)), to strengthen institutional capacities, including curriculum, faculty, scientific instrumentation, instruction delivery systems, and student recruitment and retention. Section 1405 of NARETPA (7 U.S.C. 3121) designates the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) as the lead Federal agency for agricultural research, extension, and teaching in the food and agricultural sciences. Section 1417 of NARETPA (7 U.S.C. 3152) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture, who has delegated the authority to theDirector of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), to make competitive grants to land-grant colleges and universities, to colleges and universities having significant minority enrollments and a demonstrable capacity to carry out the teaching of food and agricultural sciences, and to other colleges and universities having a demonstrable capacity to carry out the teaching of food and agricultural sciences, for a period not to exceed 5 years, to administer and conduct programs to respond to identified State, regional, national, or international educational needs in the food and agricultural sciences. (b) To the extent that funds are available, each year NIFA will publish a Federal Register (c)(1) Based on the amount of funds appropriated in any fiscal year, NIFA will determine and cite in the program announcement: (i) The targeted need area(s) to be supported or, if the entire scope of a particular targeted need area is not to be supported, the specific special interest(s) within that targeted need area to be supported; (ii) The degree level(s) to be supported; (iii) The maximum project period a proposal may request; (iv) The maximum amount of funds that may be requested by an institution under a regular, complementary, or joint project proposal; and (v) The maximum total funds that may be awarded to an institution under the program in a given fiscal year, including how funds awarded for complementary and for joint project proposals will be counted toward the institutional maximum. (2) The program announcement will also specify the deadline date for proposal submission, the number of copies of each proposal that must be submitted, the address to which a proposal must be submitted, and whether or not Form NIFA-711, “Intent to Submit a Proposal,” is requested. (d)(1) If it is deemed by NIFA that, for a given fiscal year, additional determinations are necessary, each, as relevant, will be stated in the program announcement. Such determinations may include: (i) Limits on the subject matter/emphasis areas to be supported; (ii) The maximum number of proposals that may be submitted on behalf of the same school, college, or equivalent administrative unit within an institution; (iii) The maximum total number of proposals that may be submitted by an institution; (iv) The minimum project period a proposal may request; (v) The minimum amount of funds that may be requested by an institution under a regular, complementary, or joint project proposal; (vi) The proportion of the appropriation reserved for, or available to, regular, complementary, and joint project proposals; (vii) The proportion of the appropriation reserved for, or available to, projects in each announced targeted need area; (viii) The proportion of the appropriation reserved for, or available to, each subject matter/emphasis area; (ix) The maximum number of grants that may be awarded to an institution under the program in a given fiscal year; and (x) Limits on the use of grant funds for travel or to purchase equipment, if any. (2) The program announcement also will contain any other limitations deemed necessary by NIFA for proper conduct of the program in the applicable year. (e) The regulations of this part do not apply to grants awarded by the Department of Agriculture under any other authority. § 3405.2 Definitions. As used in this part: (a) Authorized departmental officer (b) Authorized organizational representative (c) Budget period (d) Cash contributions (e) Citizen or national of the United States means: (1) A citizen or native resident of a State; or, (2) A person defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22), who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. (f) College University (1) Admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate; (2) Is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education; (3) Provides an educational program for which a baccalaureate degree or any other higher degree is awarded; (4) Is a public or other nonprofit institution; and (5) Is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association. (g) Complementary project proposal (h) Department USDA (i) Eligible institution (j) Eligible participant (k) Food and agricultural sciences (l) Grantee (m) Joint project proposal (n) Land-grant colleges and universities (o) Matching Cost-sharing (p) Peer review panel (q) Prior approval (r) Project (s) Project director (t) Project period (u) Secretary (v) State (w) Teaching (x) Third party in-kind contributions (y) United States § 3405.3 Institutional eligibility. Proposals may be submitted by land-grant and other U.S. colleges and universities offering a baccalaureate or first professional degree in at least one discipline or area of the food and agricultural sciences. Each applicant must have a demonstrable capacity for, and a significant ongoing commitment to, the teaching of food and agricultural sciences generally and to the specific need and/or subject area(s) for which a grant is requested. Awards may be made only to eligible institutions as defined in § 3405.2(i). Subpart B—Program Description § 3405.4 Purpose of the program. The Department of Agriculture is designated as the lead Federal agency for higher education in the food and agricultural sciences. In this context, NIFA has specific responsibility to initiate and support projects to strengthen college and university teaching programs in the food and agricultural sciences. One national initiative for carrying out this responsibility is the competitive Higher Education Challenge Grants Program. A primary goal of the program is to attract and ensure a continual flow of outstanding students into food and agricultural sciences higher education programs and to provide them with an education of the highest quality available anywhere in the world and which reflects the unique needs of the Nation. It is designed to stimulate and enable colleges and universities to provide the quality of education necessary to produce baccalaureate or higher degree level graduates capable of strengthening the Nation's food and agricultural scientific and professional work force. It is intended that projects supported by the program will: (a) Address a State, regional, national, or international educational need; (b) Involve a creative or nontraditional approach toward addressing that need which can serve as a model to others; (c) Encourage and facilitate better working relationships in the university science and education community, as well as between universities and the private sector, to enhance program quality and supplement available resources; and (d) Result in benefits which will likely transcend the project duration and USDA support. § 3405.5 Matching funds. Each application must provide for matching support from a non-Federal source. NIFA will cite in the program announcement the required percentage of institutional cost sharing. § 3405.6 Scope of program. This program supports projects related to strengthening undergraduate or graduate teaching programs as specified in the annual program announcement. Only proposals addressing one or more of the specific targeted need areas(s) identified in the program announcement will be funded. Proposals may focus on any subject matter area(s) in the food and agricultural sciences unless limited by determinations as specified in the annual program announcement. A proposal may address a single targeted need area or multiple targeted need areas, and may be focused on a single subject matter area or multiple subject matter areas, in any combination (e.g., curriculum development in horticulture; curriculum development, faculty enhancement, and student experiential learning in animal science; faculty enhancement in food science and agribusiness management; or instruction delivery systems and student experiential learning in plant science, horticulture, and entomology). Targeted need areas will consist of one or more of the following: (a) Curricula design and materials development. (2) Examples include, but are not limited to, curricula and materials that promote: (i) Raising the level of scholastic achievement of the Nation's graduates in the food and agricultural sciences. (ii) Addressing the special needs of particular groups of students, such as minorities, gifted and talented, or those with educational backgrounds that warrant enrichment. (iii) Using alternative instructional strategies or methodologies, including computer-assisted instruction or simulation modeling, media programs that reach large audiences efficiently and effectively, activities that provide hands-on learning experiences, and educational programs that extend learning beyond the classroom. (iv) Using sound pedagogy, particularly with regard to recent research on how to motivate students to learn, retain, apply, and transfer knowledge, skills, and competencies. (v) Building student competencies to integrate and synthesize knowledge from several disciplines. (b) Faculty preparation and enhancement for teaching. (2) Each faculty recipient of support for developmental activities under § 3405.6(b) must be an “eligible participant” as defined in § 3405.2(j) of this part. (3) Examples of developmental activities include, but are not limited to, those which enable teaching faculty to: (i) Gain experience with recent developments or innovative technology relevant to their teaching responsibilities. (ii) Work under the guidance and direction of experts who have substantial expertise in an area related to the developmental goals of the project. (iii) Work with scientists or professionals in government, industry, or other colleges or universities to learn new applications in a field. (iv) Obtain personal experience working with new ideas and techniques. (v) Expand competence with new methods of information delivery, such as computer-assisted or televised instruction. (vi) Increase understanding of the special needs of non-traditional students or students from groups that are underrepresented in the food and agricultural sciences workforce. (c) Instruction delivery systems. (2) Examples include, but are not limited to: (i) Use of computers. (ii) Teleconferencing. (iii) Networking via satellite communications. (iv) Regionalization of academic programs. (v) Mobile classrooms and laboratories. (vi) Individualized learning centers. (vii) Symposia, forums, regional or national workshops, etc. (d) Scientific instrumentation for teaching. (2) Examples include, but are not limited to: (i) Rental or purchase of modern instruments to improve student learning experiences in courses, laboratories, and field work. (ii) Development of new ways of using instrumentation to extend instructional capabilities. (iii) Establishment of equipment-sharing capability via consortia or centers that develop innovative opportunities, such as mobile laboratories or satellite access to industry or government laboratories. (e) Student experiential learning. (2) Examples include, but are not limited to, projects which: (i) Provide opportunities for students to participate in research projects, either as a part of an ongoing research project or in a project designed especially for this program. (ii) Provide opportunities for students to complete apprenticeships, internships, or similar participatory learning experiences. (iii) Expand and enrich courses which are of a practicum nature. (iv) Provide career mentoring experiences that link students with outstanding professionals. (f) Student recruitment and retention. (2) Each student recipient of monetary support for education costs or developmental purposes under § 3405.6(f) must be enrolled at an eligible institution and meet the requirement of an “eligible participant” as defined in § 3405.2(j) of this part. (3) Examples include, but are not limited to: (i) Special outreach programs for elementary and secondary students as well as parents, counselors, and the general public to broaden awareness of the extensive nature and diversity of career opportunities for graduates in the food and agricultural sciences. (ii) Special activities and materials to establish more effective linkages with high school science classes. (iii) Unique or innovative student recruitment activities, materials, and personnel. (iv) Special retention programs to assure student progression through and completion of an educational program. (v) Development and dissemination of stimulating career information materials. (vi) Use of regional or national media to promote food and agricultural sciences higher education. (vii) Providing financial incentives to enable and encourage students to pursue and complete an undergraduate or graduate degree in an area of the food and agricultural sciences. (viii) Special recruitment programs to increase the participation of students from non-traditional or underrepresented groups in courses of study in the food and agricultural sciences. § 3405.7 Joint project proposals. Applicants are encouraged to submit joint project proposals as defined in § 3405.2(m), which address regional or national problems and which will result overall in strengthening higher education in the food and agricultural sciences. The goals of such joint initiatives should include maximizing the use of limited resources by generating a critical mass of expertise and activity focused on a targeted need area(s), increasing cost-effectiveness through achieving economies of scale, strengthening the scope and quality of a project's impact, and promoting coalition building likely to transcend the project's lifetime and lead to future ventures. § 3405.8 Complementary project proposals. Institutions may submit proposals that are complementary in nature as defined in § 3405.2(g). Such complementary project proposals may be submitted by the same or by different eligible institutions. § 3405.9 Use of funds for facilities. Under the Higher Education Challenge Grants Program, the use of grant funds to plan, acquire, or construct a building or facility is not allowed. With prior approval, in accordance with the cost principles set forth in 2 CFR part 200, some grant funds may be used for minor alterations, renovations, or repairs deemed necessary to retrofit existing teaching spaces in order to carry out a funded project. However, requests to use grant funds for such purposes must demonstrate that the alterations, renovations, or repairs are incidental to the major purpose for which a grant is made. [62 FR 39317, July 22, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 75999, Dec. 19, 2014] Subpart C—Preparation of a Proposal § 3405.10 Program application materials. Program application materials in an application package will be made available to eligible institutions upon request. These materials include the program announcement, the administrative provisions for the program, and the forms needed to prepare and submit grant applications under the program. § 3405.11 Content of a proposal. (a) Proposal cover page. (2) One copy of the Form NIFA-712 must contain the pen-and-ink signatures of the Project Director(s) and authorized organizational representative for the applicant institution. (3) The title of the project shown on the “Higher Education Proposal Cover Page” must be brief (80-character maximum) yet represent the major thrust of the project. This information will be used by the Department to provide information to the Congress and other interested parties. (4) In block 7. of Form NIFA-712, enter “Higher Education Challenge Grants Program.” (5) In block 8.a. of Form NIFA-712, enter “Teaching.” In block 8.b. identify the code for the targeted need area(s) as found on the reverse of the form. If a proposal focuses on multiple targeted need areas, enter each code associated with the project and place an asterisk (*) immediately following the code for the primary targeted need area. In block 8.c. identify the major area(s) of emphasis as found on the reverse of the form. If a proposal focuses on multiple areas of emphasis, enter each code associated with the project. This information will be used by program staff for the proper assignment of proposals to peer reviewers. (6) In block 9. of Form NIFA-712, indicate if the proposal is a complementary project proposal or a joint project proposal as defined in § 3405.2(g) and § 3405.2(m), respectively, of this part. If it is not a complementary project proposal or a joint project proposal, identify it as a regular project proposal. (7) In block 13. of Form NIFA-712, indicate if the proposal is a new, first-time submission or if the proposal is a resubmission of a proposal that has been submitted to, but not funded under, the Higher Education Challenge Grants Program in a previous competition. (b) Table of contents. (c) Project summary. (2) If the proposal is a complementary project proposal, as defined in § 3405.2(g) of this part, indicate such and identify the other complementary project(s) by citing the name of the submitting institution, the title of the project, the project director, and the grant number (if funded in a previous year) exactly as shown on the cover page of the complementary project so that appropriate consideration can be given to the interrelatedness of the proposals in the evaluation process. (3) If the proposal is a joint project proposal, as defined in § 3405.2(m) of this part, indicate such and identify the other participating institutions and the key faculty member or other individual responsible for coordinating the project at each institution. (4) The Project Summary should be a concise description of the proposed activity suitable for publication by the Department to inform the general public about awards under the program. The text must not exceed one page, single-spaced. The Project Summary should be a self-contained description of the activity which would result if the proposal is funded by USDA. It should include: The objectives of the project; a synopsis of the plan of operation; a description of how the project will strengthen higher education in the food and agricultural sciences in the United States; and the plans for disseminating project results. The Project Summary should be written so that a technically literate reader can evaluate the use of Federal funds in support of the project. (d) Resubmission of a proposal Resubmission of previously unfunded proposals. (2) Resubmission of previously funded proposals. i.e. (e) Narrative of a proposal. (1) Potential for advancing the quality of education Impact. (B) Clearly state the specific instructional problem or opportunity to be addressed. (C) Describe how and by whom the focus and scope of the project were determined. Summarize the body of knowledge which substantiates the need for the proposed project. (D) Describe ongoing or recently completed significant activities related to the proposed project for which previous funding was received under this program. (E) Discuss how the project will be of value at the State, regional, national, or international level(s). (F) Discuss how the benefits to be derived from the project will transcend the applicant institution or the grant period. Also discuss the probabilities of the project being adapted by other institutions. For example, can the project serve as a model for others? (ii) Continuation plans. (iii) Innovation. (iv) Products and results. (2) Overall approach and cooperative linkages Proposed approach bjectives. (B) Plan of operation. 1 ( 2 ( 3 (C) Timetable. (ii) Evaluation plans. (B) Provide a plan for evaluating the effectiveness of the end results upon conclusion of the project. Include the same kinds of information requested in § 3405.11(e)(2)(ii)(A). (iii) Dissemination plans. (iv) Partnerships and collaborative efforts. (B) Provide evidence, via letters from the parties involved, that arrangements necessary for collaborative partnerships or joint initiatives have been discussed and realistically can be expected to come to fruition, or actually have been finalized contingent on an award under this program. Letters must be signed by an official who has the authority to commit the resources of the organization. Such letters should be referenced in the plan of operation, but the actual letters should be included in the Appendix section of the proposal. Any potential conflict(s) of interest that might result from the proposed collaborative arrangements must be discussed in detail. (3) Institutional commitment and resources Institutional commitment. (ii) Institutional resources. (f) Key personnel. (g) Budget and cost-effectiveness Budget form. (ii) The approved negotiated instruction rate or the rate allowed by law should be used when computing indirect costs. If a reduced rate of indirect costs is voluntarily requested from USDA, the remaining allowable indirect costs may be used as matching funds. (2) Matching funds. (i) When preparing the column of Form NIFA-713 entitled “Applicant Contributions to Matching Funds,” only those costs to be contributed by the applicant for the purposes of matching should be shown. The total amount of this column should be indicated in item M. (ii) In item N of Form NIFA-713, show a total dollar amount for Cash Contributions from both the applicant and any third parties; also show a total dollar amount (based on current fair market value) for Non-cash Contributions from both the applicant and any third parties. (iii) To be counted toward the matching requirements stated in § 3405.5 of this part, proposals must include written verification of any actual commitments of matching support (including both cash and non-cash contributions) from third parties. Written verification means— (A) For any third party cash contributions, a separate pledge agreement for each donation, signed by the authorized organizational representative(s) of the donor organization and the applicant institution, which must include: ( 1 ( 2 ( 3 ( 4 ( 5 (B) For any third party non-cash contributions, a separate pledge agreement for each contribution, signed by the authorized organizational representative(s) of the donor organization and the applicant institution, which must include: ( 1 ( 2 ( 3 ( 4 ( 5 (iv) All pledge agreements referenced in § 3405.11(g)(2)(iii) (A) and (B) must be placed in the proposal immediately following Form NIFA-713. The sources and amounts of all matching support from outside the applicant institution should be summarized in the Budget Narrative section of the proposal. (v) Applicants should refer to 2 CFR part 200 and part 400 for further guidance and other requirements relating to matching and allowable costs. (3) Chart on shared budget for joint project proposal. (4) Budget narrative. (ii) Justify that the total budget, including funds requested from USDA and any matching support provided, will be adequate to carry out the activities of the project. Provide a summary of sources and amounts of all third party matching support. (iii) Justify the project's cost-effectiveness. Show how the project maximizes the use of limited resources, optimizes educational value for the dollar, achieves economies of scale, or leverages additional funds. For example, discuss how the project has the potential to generate a critical mass of expertise and activity focused on a targeted need area, or to promote coalition building that could lead to future ventures. (iv) Include the percentage of time key personnel will work on the project, both during the academic year and summer. When salaries of university personnel will be paid by a combination of USDA and institutional funds, the total compensation must not exceed the faculty member's regular annual compensation. In addition, the total commitment of time devoted to the project, when combined with time for teaching and research duties, other sponsored agreements, and other employment obligations to the institution, must not exceed 100 percent of the normal workload for which the employee is compensated, in accordance with established university policies and applicable Federal cost principles. (v) If the proposal addresses more than one targeted need area (e.g., student experiential learning and instruction delivery systems), estimate the proportion of the funds requested from USDA that will support each respective targeted need area. (h) Current and pending support. (i) Appendix. [62 FR 39317, July 22, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 75999, Dec. 19, 2014] Subpart D—Submission of a Proposal § 3405.12 Intent to submit a proposal. To assist NIFA in preparing for the review of proposals, institutions planning to submit proposals may be requested to complete Form NIFA-711, “Intent to Submit a Proposal,” provided in the application package. NIFA will determine each year if Intent to Submit a Proposal forms will be requested and provide such information in the program announcement. If Intent to Submit a Proposal forms are required, one form should be completed and returned for each proposal an institution anticipates submitting. Submitting this form does not commit an institution to any course of action, nor does failure to send this form prohibit an institution from submitting a proposal. § 3405.13 When and where to submit a proposal. The program announcement will provide the deadline date for submitting a proposal, the number of copies of each proposal that must be submitted, and the address to which proposals must be submitted. Subpart E—Proposal Review and Evaluation § 3405.14 Proposal review. The proposal evaluation process includes both internal staff review and merit evaluation by peer review panels comprised of scientists, educators, business representatives, and Government officials. Peer review panels will be selected and structured to provide optimum expertise and objective judgment in the evaluation of proposals. § 3405.15 Evaluation criteria. The maximum score a proposal can receive is 200 points. Unless otherwise stated in the annual solicitation published in the Federal Register, Evaluation Criterion Weight (a) Potential for advancing the quality of education: This criterion is used to assess the likelihood that the project will have a substantial impact upon and advance the quality of food and agricultural sciences higher education by strengthening institutional capacities through promoting education reform to meet clearly delineated needs. (1) Impact—Does the project address a targeted need area(s)? Is the problem or opportunity clearly documented? Does the project address a State, regional, national, or international problem or opportunity? Will the benefits to be derived from the project transcend the applicant institution and/or the grant period? Is it probable that other institutions will adapt this project for their own use? Can the project serve as a model for others? 20 points. (2) Continuation plans—Are there plans for continuation or expansion of the project beyond USDA support? Are there indications of external, non-Federal support? Are there realistic plans for making the project self-supporting? 10 points. (3) Innovation—Are significant aspects of the project based on an innovative or a non-traditional approach toward solving a higher education problem or strengthening the quality of higher education in the food and agricultural sciences? If successful, is the project likely to lead to education reform? 20 points. (4) Products and results—Are the expected products and results of the project clearly explained? Do they have the potential to strengthen food and agricultural sciences higher education? Are the products likely to be of high quality? Will the project contribute to a better understanding of or improvement in the quality, distribution, effectiveness, or racial, ethnic, or gender diversity of the Nation's food and agricultural scientific and professional expertise base? 20 points. (b) Overall approach and cooperative linkages: This criterion relates to the soundness of the proposed approach and the quality of the partnerships likely to evolve as a result of the project. (1) Proposed approach—Do the objectives and plan of operation appear to be sound and appropriate relative to the targeted need area(s) and the impact anticipated? Are the procedures managerially, educationally, and/or scientifically sound? Is the overall plan integrated with or does it expand upon other major efforts to improve the quality of food and agricultural sciences higher education? Does the timetable appear to be readily achievable? 20 points. (2) Evaluation—Are the evaluation plans adequate and reasonable? Do they allow for continuous and/or frequent feedback during the life of the project? Are the individuals involved in project evaluation skilled in evaluation strategies and procedures? Can they provide an objective evaluation? Do evaluation plans facilitate the measurement of project progress and outcomes? 10 points. (3) Dissemination—Does the proposed project include clearly outlined and realistic mechanisms that will lead to widespread dissemination of project results, including national electronic communication systems, publications, presentations at professional conferences, and/or use by faculty development or research/teaching skills workshops 10 points. (4) Partnerships and collaborative efforts—Will the project expand partnership ventures among disciplines at a university, between colleges and universities, or with the private sector? Will the project lead to long-term relationships or cooperative partnerships that are likely to enhance program quality or supplement resources available to food and agricultural sciences higher education? 20 points. (c) Institutional commitment and resources: This criterion relates to the institution's commitment to the project and the adequacy of institutional resources available to carry out the project. (1) Institutional commitment—Is there evidence to substantiate that the institution attributes a high-priority to the project, that the project is linked to the achievement of the institution's long-term goals, that it will help satisfy the institution's high-priority objectives, or that the project is supported by the institution's strategic plans? 10 points. (2) Institutional resources—Will the project have adequate support to carry out the proposed activities? Will the project have reasonable access to needed resources such as instructional instrumentation, facilities, computer services, library and other instruction support resources? 10 points. (d) Key personnel: 20 points. This criterion relates to the number and qualifications of the key persons who will carry out the project. Are designated project personnel qualified to carry out a successful project? Are there sufficient numbers of personnel associated with the project to achieve the stated objectives and the anticipated outcomes? (e) Budget and cost-effectiveness: This criterion relates to the extent to which the total budget adequately supports the project and is cost-effective. (1) Budget—Is the budget request justifiable? Are costs reasonable and necessary? Will the total budget be adequate to carry out project activities? Are the source(s) and amount(s) of non-Federal matching support clearly identified and appropriately documented? For a joint project proposal, is the shared budget explained clearly and in sufficient detail? 10 points. (2) Cost-effectiveness—Is the proposed project cost-effective? Does it demonstrate a creative use of limited resources, maximize educational value per dollar of USDA support, achieve economies of scale, leverage additional funds or have the potential to do so, focus expertise and activity on a targeted need area, or promote coalition building for current or future ventures? 10 points. (f) Overall quality of proposal: 10 points. This criterion relates to the degree to which the proposal complies with the application guidelines and is of high quality. Is the proposal enhanced by its adherence to instructions (table of contents, organization, pagination, margin and font size, the 20-page limitation, appendices, etc.); accuracy of forms; clarity of budget narrative; well prepared vitae for all key personnel associated with the project; and presentation (are ideas effectively presented, clearly articulated, and thoroughly explained, etc.)? Subpart F—Supplementary Information § 3405.16 Access to peer review information. After final decisions have been announced, NIFA will, upon request, inform the project director of the reasons for its decision on a proposal. Verbatim copies of summary reviews, not including the identity of the peer reviewers, will be made available to respective project directors upon specific request. § 3405.17 Grant awards. (a) General. (b) Organizational management information. (c) Notice of grant award. (1) Legal name and address of performing organization. (2) Title of project. (3) Name(s) and address(es) of project director(s). (4) Identifying grant number assigned by the Department. (5) Project period, which specifies how long the Department intends to support the effort without requiring reapplication for funds. (6) Total amount of Federal financial assistance approved during the project period. (7) Legal authority(ies) under which the grant is awarded. (8) Approved budget plan for categorizing allocable project funds to accomplish the stated purpose of the grant award. (9) Other information or provisions deemed necessary by the Department to carry out its granting activities or to accomplish the purpose of this particular project grant. (d) Obligation of the Federal Government. [62 FR 39317, July 22, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 75999, Dec. 19, 2014] § 3405.18 Use of funds; changes. (a) Delegation of fiscal responsibility. (b) Change in project plans. (2) Changes in approved goals, or objectives, shall be requested by the grantee and approved in writing by the authorized departmental officer prior to effecting such changes. In no event shall requests for such changes be approved that are outside the scope of the approved project. (3) Changes in approved project leadership or the replacement or reassignment of other key project personnel shall be requested by the grantee and approved in writing by the authorized departmental officer prior to effecting such changes. (4) Transfers of actual performance of the substantive programmatic work in whole or in part and provisions for payment of funds, whether or not Federal funds are involved, shall be requested by the grantee and approved in writing by the authorized departmental officer prior to effecting such transfers. (c) Changes in project period. (d) Changes in approved budget. (1) Involve transfers of amounts budgeted for indirect costs to absorb an increase in direct costs; (2) Involve transfers of amounts budgeted for direct costs to accommodate changes in indirect cost rates negotiated during a budget period and not approved when a grant was awarded; or (3) Involve transfers or expenditures of amounts requiring prior approval as set forth in the applicable Federal cost principles, Departmental regulations, or in the grant award. § 3405.19 Monitoring progress of funded projects. (a) During the tenure of a grant, project directors must attend at least one national project directors meeting, if offered, in Washington, DC or any other announced location. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss project and grant management opportunities for collaborative efforts, future directions for education reform, and opportunities to enhance dissemination of exemplary end products/results. (b) An Annual Performance Report must be submitted to the USDA program contact person within 90 days after the completion of the first year of the project and annually thereafter during the life of the grant. Generally, the Annual Performance Reports should include a summary of the overall progress toward project objectives, current problems or unusual developments, the next year's activities, and any other information that is pertinent to the ongoing project or which may be specified in the terms and conditions of the award. (c) A Final Performance Report must be submitted to the USDA program contact person within 90 days after the expiration date of the project. The expiration date is specified in the award documents and modifications thereto, if any. Generally, the Final Performance Report should be a summary of the completed project, including: A review of project objectives and accomplishments; a description of any products and outcomes resulting from the project; activities undertaken to disseminate products and outcomes; partnerships and collaborative ventures that resulted from the project; future initiatives that are planned as a result of the project; the impact of the project on the project director(s), the institution, and the food and agricultural sciences higher education system; and data on project personnel and beneficiaries. The Final Performance Report should be accompanied by samples or copies of any products or publications resulting from or developed by the project. The Final Performance Report must also contain any other information which may be specified in the terms and conditions of the award. § 3405.20 Other Federal statutes and regulations that apply. (a) The Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) issued guidance on Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 CFR part 200 on December 26, 2013. In 2 CFR 400.1, the Department adopted OMB's guidance in subparts A through F of 2 CFR part 200, as supplemented by 2 CFR part 400, as the Department's policies and procedures for uniform administrative requirements, cost principles, and audit requirements for federal awards. As a result, this regulation contains references to 2 CFR part 200 as it has regulatory effect for the Department's programs and activities.” (b) Several other Federal statutes and/or regulations apply to grant proposals considered for review or to research project grants awarded under this part. These include but are not limited to: 2 CFR part 200—Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 2 CFR part 180 and Part 417—OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Government-Wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) and USDA Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension 7 CFR part 1c—USDA Implementation of the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. 7 CFR 1.1—USDA Implementation of Freedom of Information Act. 7 CFR part 3—USDA Implementation of OMB Circular A-129 Regarding Debt Collection. 7 CFR part 15, subpart A—USDA Implementation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 7 CFR part 3407—NIFA Procedures To Implement The National Environmental Policy Act; 29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973) and 7 CFR part 15B (USDA implementation of statute)—prohibiting discrimination based upon physical or mental handicap in Federally assisted programs; and 35 U.S.C. 200 et seq. [79 FR 75999, Dec. 19, 2014] § 3405.21 Confidential aspects of proposals and awards. When a proposal results in a grant, it becomes a part of the record of the Agency's transactions, available to the public upon specific request. Information that the Secretary determines to be of a privileged nature will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant wishes to have considered as privileged should be clearly marked as such and sent in a separate statement, two copies of which should accompany the proposal. The original copy of a proposal that does not result in a grant will be retained by the Agency for a period of one year. Other copies will be destroyed. Such a proposal will be released only with the consent of the applicant or to the extent required by law. A proposal may be withdrawn at any time prior to the final action thereon. § 3405.22 Evaluation of program. Grantees should be aware that NIFA may, as a part of its own program evaluation activities, carry out in-depth evaluations of assisted activities. Thus, grantees should be prepared to cooperate with NIFA personnel, or persons retained by NIFA, evaluating the institutional context and the impact of any supported project. Grantees may be asked to provide general information on any students and faculty supported, in whole or in part, by a grant awarded under this program; information that may be requested includes, but is not limited to, standardized academic achievement test scores, grade point average, academic standing, career patterns, age, race/ethnicity, gender, citizenship, and disability.