ΜΙΑ Η ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ ΓΗ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ:U.S. Department of State Weekly Digest Bulletin

Conversation opened. 1 unread message.

Skip to content
Using Gmail with screen readers

Search

Compose

Labels

Inbox

Starred

Snoozed

Important

Sent

Drafts

Categories

Social

Updates

Forums

Promotions

INBOX/old

Travel

More

 

Hangouts

 

 

 

More

1 of 1

U.S. Department of State Weekly Digest Bulletin Inbox x U.S. Department of State <usstatebpa@public.govdelivery.com> Sun, Feb 24, 12:09 PM (23 hours ago)  to me Secretary's Remarks: The Gambia's National Day 02/18/2019 You are subscribed to Secretary's Remarks for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Secretary's Remarks: The Gambia's National Day 02/18/2019 07:01 AM EST Press Statement Michael R. Pompeo Washington, DC February 18, 2019 February 18, 2019 On behalf of the United States, I congratulate the people of The Gambia as you celebrate the 54th anniversary of your independence on February 18. We remain committed to a strong partnership with The Gambia and look forward to continued cooperation on efforts to promote democracy, good governance, and economic growth. The United States celebrates with The Gambia as you honor this historic day. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor: Freedom of Movement for Internally Displaced Persons in Rukban 02/18/2019 You are subscribed to Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor: Freedom of Movement for Internally Displaced Persons in Rukban 02/18/2019 02:22 PM EST Press Statement Robert Palladino Washington, DC February 18, 2019 The United States applauds the recent success of the United Nations and Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC) humanitarian convoy which brought life-saving humanitarian assistance to more than 40,000 displaced people at the Rukban informal camp in south-eastern Syria. The delivery, complete with careful distribution to all groups and UN/SARC monitoring, ensured that aid reached all those who needed it. We urge that access for humanitarian assistance must continue to Rukban and to all areas in Syria where people are in need. The United States has long advocated and will continue to advocate for freedom of movement for internally displaced persons (IDPs). It has not impeded and will not impede the movement of any IDPs who wish to depart from the Rukban encampment. Nor will it force anyone to leave. The United States fully supports a process that is free from coercion and allows for safe, voluntary, and dignified departures for those wishing to leave Rukban. Such a process must begin with sustained humanitarian access: departures under conditions of severe deprivation are inherently departures under duress. The United States has therefore called for many months for the Syrian regime to allow rapid, safe, and unhindered UN access to the Rukban encampment. The recent humanitarian convoy was a positive step, and we call upon Russia to help facilitate continued, regular humanitarian deliveries. Any unilateral process to arrange departures that is not transparent or does not allow for informed decision-making by Rukban residents is not acceptable. A process of safe, voluntary, and dignified departures should be closely coordinated with the relevant UN agencies; it must ensure that IDPs have access to impartial information on their options, guarantees against arbitrary arrest and detention, a clear understanding of military conscription requirements, and information on conditions in their place of return. During the recent humanitarian delivery, the UN conducted a survey of residents’ needs and intentions – a crucial first step in planning a process of safe, voluntary, and dignified returns. The UN is analyzing this data, and we look forward to working with the UN and other partners to support safe, voluntary, and informed departures on the basis of this survey for those who choose to leave Rukban. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Secretary's Remarks: Interview With Thora Arnorsdottir of RUV 02/19/2019 You are subscribed to Secretary's Remarks for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Secretary's Remarks: Interview With Thora Arnorsdottir of RUV 02/19/2019 06:47 AM EST Interview Michael R. Pompeo U.S. Embassy Reykjavik Reykjavik, Iceland February 15, 2019 QUESTION: So welcome, Mr. Pompeo. SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, very much. Thanks for having me on your show. QUESTION: So the scope of your visit to Hungary, Poland, Slovakia on this European tour was pretty clear, but why is Reykjavik your last stop? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, this is a place where America needs to continue to engage the important relationship we have, and you see it with American tourists coming here. So there’s a deep economic relationship. We have had a historic, important security relationship as well. The geostrategic importance of the place at which the island sits escapes no one, including some of America’s adversaries and the adversaries, I think, of European countries as well, and so I wanted to get here to see our American friends here and talk to them about ways we can further the cooperation between our two countries. QUESTION: So maybe to simplify, you’re afraid that we’ve made new friends in your absence maybe. SECRETARY POMPEO: If America is not engaged, if we pull back, folks will fill the vacuum, and the Russians and the Chinese see that and use every opportunity they can, and we think that presents risk to freedom-loving nations like Iceland and freedom-loving nations like America. And so if we work together and America is on the scene, we think we’ll make lives for each of our two countries much, much better. QUESTION: So I want to stick to the Arctic for a bit because, like you said, the Chinese have put forward their policy; they call it a Silk Road. They’ve been working here in diplomacy for decades. And we have Russian submarines in our waters that we don’t know what are doing. They have eyes set on the Arctic. Where have you been? Where is the U.S. policy on the Arctic? What’s the plan? SECRETARY POMPEO: So this administration – yeah. It’s a fantastic question. It’s why I’m here. This administration has developed a plan. We have a theory. You can read it in our National Security Strategy. It is laid out very clearly. We believe that this is a space – the Arctic is a space where there should be freedom of navigation; there should be low tension; there should be security; there should be rule of law; there should be transparency about what’s taking place. We think if those things happen, that good countries of the world, countries like Iceland, the democracies of the world will be successful, and those who have malign intent, those who are coming to the Arctic for reasons that are about domination or about control or about extending their economic influence at the expense of others rather than creating win-win situations, we think they will be the net losers if we can build out an Arctic system that looks like that. Iceland has been at the forefront of it, and we very much want to make sure we’re partnered and engaged. QUESTION: This is a very beautiful vision, but how are you going to make sure that’s what’s going to happen? I mean, you could read between – not even between the lines – it was quite straightforward that you’re afraid that Iceland is going to be a bridgehead of China -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. QUESTION: -- that have been in the Arctic. How are you going to ensure this vision comes true? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. So it’s not just Iceland. China has these ambitions elsewhere, as far – places as far away as Africa and places like Asia as well, in what I could call the Chinese near-abroad. We think we – collectively, we think the West has a better model for the world, and so how will we do this? First, it’s a series of conversations. It’s to make sure that we all share the same set of facts about the risks. The first way one protects themselves is they arm themselves with knowledge about risk, and so one of the things that we have done this last year and a half is go out to our friends around the world and identify for them basic facts about the risk that engagement with some of these other countries presents. And we think when they see that, they’ll be prepared to engage along with us, invest their own resources in protecting themselves, not only from a security perspective, but importantly, from an economic perspective as well. Some of the practices that China has engaged in can only be deemed predatory economic practices, which are much to the detriment of the nations that allow them to do that. So we want to get out and share that understanding, and then I’m confident we will build institutions and relationships that allow freedom and democracy to flourish. And where the Chinese show up simply to compete, we think this is very reasonable. It’s not a containment strategy but one that says eyes wide open and make sure that the deals that countries are entering into with China actually benefit the countries that engage in them. QUESTION: Now, because our time is limited, I’m going to move southwards from the Arctic to the Middle East, the region which has been in a critical situation for too many years. Now, there is a thing that I don’t get. President Trump declared victory over the Islamic State in Syria in December in a tweet – the only reason for us being there – and then John Bolton comes and says no, no, no, we’re not pulling out, we’re not deserting our allies and there is a lot of Daesh still to fight, and then you say, well, we’re going to pull out but we’re still going to get rid of every Iranian boot in Syria, I think you said -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. QUESTION: -- and we’re going to protect our allies, the Kurds. How are you going to have it both ways? With, like, magic and mind power? I mean, how do you do it if you’re not there? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. I actually think we all three said the exact same thing. The mission set hasn’t changed remotely. The caliphate that was in Syria – you remember the people in cages; you remember the beheadings; you remember that they controlled a massive amount of territory. That’s gone. It’s gone in part because of good work by the United States but also good work by our allies and good work by the local forces in Syria as well, and in Iraq. This was really good work. As that’s advanced, as the caliphate has been taken down, the mission doesn’t end. We fight ISIS on multiple continents today, but our tactics will change, and they’ll continue to change, and we will adapt just as ISIS adapts. We get the threat from radical Islamic terrorism. President Trump understands this intently. We’re determined to fight them where we find them and to reduce the risk to not only the United States but to our allies. But it’s not the case that we have to have 2,000 or 4,000 or 14,000 soldiers in each of these places. We can use locals to help us – it’s in their back yard – and we can use other means by which to push back against this, not the least of which is fighting back against the ideology which delivers it. QUESTION: But you can understand the worries that this has created in the region. I mean -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Actually I don’t. Actually I don’t don’t, to be honest with you. I don’t understand. QUESTION: I mean, honestly and clearly, what does it mean for the allies of the United States in Syria, such as the Kurds? I mean, they obviously were very worried when this declaration came out. SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, they were even more worried before we were there. QUESTION: Sure. I mean -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. And – right. QUESTION: -- and as you said, President Erdogan – why should he give them any mercy south of the border in Syria when it’s not even the case in his own country? SECRETARY POMPEO: Because we’ve made clear that there’ll be a real price if he doesn’t. President Trump made very clear his expectations with respect to how Turkey would treat those to his south inside of Syria. He said that there will be a real cost associated with behavior in that way, and we are fully engaged diplomatically to deliver an outcome which protects the folks that are in Syria as well as ensures that those people in Syria aren’t attacking Turkey as well. We think they are each entitled to their own security and we’re confident we can deliver that. QUESTION: Now, I know you’re very focused on Iran as well, and the European countries have chosen to stick to negotiations and diplomatic relations, so the European foreign minister didn’t show up to the conference in Poland on Iran. Why do you think – why is it your belief that the maximum pressure strategy will change a thing in the regime in Iran? SECRETARY POMPEO: So three things. We’re not focused on Iran; we’re focused on security. It turns out the biggest risk to security in the Middle East is the Islamic Republic of Iran, and so that’s the place one has to go to tackle the problem. It was a fascinating – we had 60 countries. I regret that Ms. Mogherini didn’t attend. I think it’s unfortunate for the EU that she chose not to come. It saddens me because we had over 60 countries there, and we had an historic visit; we had Arab countries and we had the prime minister of Israel in the same room, talking about a common threat. We didn’t coach them. We didn’t train them. They showed up and each made clear that the biggest threat to the stability and the safety of their own people is the Islamic Republic of Iran. You know the history. The Arabs and the Israelis have a long history. It has not been sitting in a room together, talking about how to push back on a threat to protect their own people. It was historic. It was important. We think it’s going to lead to great things in the months and years ahead. And the United States is determined. The pressure campaign is aimed at a singular thing: it is to deny wealth to Qasem Soleimani and to Rouhani and Zarif so that they can commit terror. They’re the world’s largest state sponsor of terror – so that they don’t have the wealth and resources to commit terror acts all around the world, including their assassination campaign in the heart of Europe. QUESTION: Now, I can’t have the Secretary of State in front of me today without asking, even though I know that the building of the wall is not in your ministry, but falls under the department of home security, and I know that you support it, but do you think it’s justified to declare an emergency to get the money for it? SECRETARY POMPEO: Absolutely. QUESTION: That’s a clear answer. Is it round-up? MR PALLADINO: We’re done. We’ve got to wrap it up. (Break.) QUESTION: That’s the thing. You’ve been Secretary of State for a year. If everything goes to plan, you have two more years. We live in interesting times, to put it mildly. What are your priorities? Like what do you want to have achieved in two years’ time? You don’t change the world, but where do you want to be in two years’ time? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, so three things. One, I lead a big organization, the United States Department of State. I want to make sure that team is ready and capable of delivering American diplomacy in every corner of the world in a professional way long after I’m gone, so I spend a lot of time building out the team and working to make the State Department effective and great partners for countries like Iceland. Second, President Trump is very focused on the issue of nuclear proliferation and the risk that nuclear weapons pose to the world. In a couple weeks he will travel – I’ll go along with him – to Hanoi, where he will again meet with Chairman Kim Jong-un, and I hope we can make a material decrease in the risk that his – that Kim Jong-un’s nuclear weapons pose to the world. The final thing is we want to make sure that international institutions are fit to function. Many of these – NATO, the IMF – lots of international institutions were built decades ago, and President Trump is committed to making sure we ask the question, do they still work? Where they do, United States is incredibly supportive; where they don’t, we want to fix them. We want to make sure that the set of rules was in place, that the goals that those institutions were created for, the problems they were intended to solve are actually the problems that they’re working on effectively. And if we can do that, if I can be a small part of helping that take place, I’ll think – I’ll have considered my time as the Secretary of State a success. QUESTION: Thank you very much for being with us. SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you very much, ma’am. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Europe and Eurasia: Interview With Thora Arnorsdottir of RUV 02/19/2019 You are subscribed to Europe and Eurasia for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Europe and Eurasia: Interview With Thora Arnorsdottir of RUV 02/19/2019 06:47 AM EST Interview Michael R. Pompeo U.S. Embassy Reykjavik Reykjavik, Iceland February 15, 2019 QUESTION: So welcome, Mr. Pompeo. SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, very much. Thanks for having me on your show. QUESTION: So the scope of your visit to Hungary, Poland, Slovakia on this European tour was pretty clear, but why is Reykjavik your last stop? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, this is a place where America needs to continue to engage the important relationship we have, and you see it with American tourists coming here. So there’s a deep economic relationship. We have had a historic, important security relationship as well. The geostrategic importance of the place at which the island sits escapes no one, including some of America’s adversaries and the adversaries, I think, of European countries as well, and so I wanted to get here to see our American friends here and talk to them about ways we can further the cooperation between our two countries. QUESTION: So maybe to simplify, you’re afraid that we’ve made new friends in your absence maybe. SECRETARY POMPEO: If America is not engaged, if we pull back, folks will fill the vacuum, and the Russians and the Chinese see that and use every opportunity they can, and we think that presents risk to freedom-loving nations like Iceland and freedom-loving nations like America. And so if we work together and America is on the scene, we think we’ll make lives for each of our two countries much, much better. QUESTION: So I want to stick to the Arctic for a bit because, like you said, the Chinese have put forward their policy; they call it a Silk Road. They’ve been working here in diplomacy for decades. And we have Russian submarines in our waters that we don’t know what are doing. They have eyes set on the Arctic. Where have you been? Where is the U.S. policy on the Arctic? What’s the plan? SECRETARY POMPEO: So this administration – yeah. It’s a fantastic question. It’s why I’m here. This administration has developed a plan. We have a theory. You can read it in our National Security Strategy. It is laid out very clearly. We believe that this is a space – the Arctic is a space where there should be freedom of navigation; there should be low tension; there should be security; there should be rule of law; there should be transparency about what’s taking place. We think if those things happen, that good countries of the world, countries like Iceland, the democracies of the world will be successful, and those who have malign intent, those who are coming to the Arctic for reasons that are about domination or about control or about extending their economic influence at the expense of others rather than creating win-win situations, we think they will be the net losers if we can build out an Arctic system that looks like that. Iceland has been at the forefront of it, and we very much want to make sure we’re partnered and engaged. QUESTION: This is a very beautiful vision, but how are you going to make sure that’s what’s going to happen? I mean, you could read between – not even between the lines – it was quite straightforward that you’re afraid that Iceland is going to be a bridgehead of China -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. QUESTION: -- that have been in the Arctic. How are you going to ensure this vision comes true? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. So it’s not just Iceland. China has these ambitions elsewhere, as far – places as far away as Africa and places like Asia as well, in what I could call the Chinese near-abroad. We think we – collectively, we think the West has a better model for the world, and so how will we do this? First, it’s a series of conversations. It’s to make sure that we all share the same set of facts about the risks. The first way one protects themselves is they arm themselves with knowledge about risk, and so one of the things that we have done this last year and a half is go out to our friends around the world and identify for them basic facts about the risk that engagement with some of these other countries presents. And we think when they see that, they’ll be prepared to engage along with us, invest their own resources in protecting themselves, not only from a security perspective, but importantly, from an economic perspective as well. Some of the practices that China has engaged in can only be deemed predatory economic practices, which are much to the detriment of the nations that allow them to do that. So we want to get out and share that understanding, and then I’m confident we will build institutions and relationships that allow freedom and democracy to flourish. And where the Chinese show up simply to compete, we think this is very reasonable. It’s not a containment strategy but one that says eyes wide open and make sure that the deals that countries are entering into with China actually benefit the countries that engage in them. QUESTION: Now, because our time is limited, I’m going to move southwards from the Arctic to the Middle East, the region which has been in a critical situation for too many years. Now, there is a thing that I don’t get. President Trump declared victory over the Islamic State in Syria in December in a tweet – the only reason for us being there – and then John Bolton comes and says no, no, no, we’re not pulling out, we’re not deserting our allies and there is a lot of Daesh still to fight, and then you say, well, we’re going to pull out but we’re still going to get rid of every Iranian boot in Syria, I think you said -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. QUESTION: -- and we’re going to protect our allies, the Kurds. How are you going to have it both ways? With, like, magic and mind power? I mean, how do you do it if you’re not there? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. I actually think we all three said the exact same thing. The mission set hasn’t changed remotely. The caliphate that was in Syria – you remember the people in cages; you remember the beheadings; you remember that they controlled a massive amount of territory. That’s gone. It’s gone in part because of good work by the United States but also good work by our allies and good work by the local forces in Syria as well, and in Iraq. This was really good work. As that’s advanced, as the caliphate has been taken down, the mission doesn’t end. We fight ISIS on multiple continents today, but our tactics will change, and they’ll continue to change, and we will adapt just as ISIS adapts. We get the threat from radical Islamic terrorism. President Trump understands this intently. We’re determined to fight them where we find them and to reduce the risk to not only the United States but to our allies. But it’s not the case that we have to have 2,000 or 4,000 or 14,000 soldiers in each of these places. We can use locals to help us – it’s in their back yard – and we can use other means by which to push back against this, not the least of which is fighting back against the ideology which delivers it. QUESTION: But you can understand the worries that this has created in the region. I mean -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Actually I don’t. Actually I don’t don’t, to be honest with you. I don’t understand. QUESTION: I mean, honestly and clearly, what does it mean for the allies of the United States in Syria, such as the Kurds? I mean, they obviously were very worried when this declaration came out. SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, they were even more worried before we were there. QUESTION: Sure. I mean -- SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. And – right. QUESTION: -- and as you said, President Erdogan – why should he give them any mercy south of the border in Syria when it’s not even the case in his own country? SECRETARY POMPEO: Because we’ve made clear that there’ll be a real price if he doesn’t. President Trump made very clear his expectations with respect to how Turkey would treat those to his south inside of Syria. He said that there will be a real cost associated with behavior in that way, and we are fully engaged diplomatically to deliver an outcome which protects the folks that are in Syria as well as ensures that those people in Syria aren’t attacking Turkey as well. We think they are each entitled to their own security and we’re confident we can deliver that. QUESTION: Now, I know you’re very focused on Iran as well, and the European countries have chosen to stick to negotiations and diplomatic relations, so the European foreign minister didn’t show up to the conference in Poland on Iran. Why do you think – why is it your belief that the maximum pressure strategy will change a thing in the regime in Iran? SECRETARY POMPEO: So three things. We’re not focused on Iran; we’re focused on security. It turns out the biggest risk to security in the Middle East is the Islamic Republic of Iran, and so that’s the place one has to go to tackle the problem. It was a fascinating – we had 60 countries. I regret that Ms. Mogherini didn’t attend. I think it’s unfortunate for the EU that she chose not to come. It saddens me because we had over 60 countries there, and we had an historic visit; we had Arab countries and we had the prime minister of Israel in the same room, talking about a common threat. We didn’t coach them. We didn’t train them. They showed up and each made clear that the biggest threat to the stability and the safety of their own people is the Islamic Republic of Iran. You know the history. The Arabs and the Israelis have a long history. It has not been sitting in a room together, talking about how to push back on a threat to protect their own people. It was historic. It was important. We think it’s going to lead to great things in the months and years ahead. And the United States is determined. The pressure campaign is aimed at a singular thing: it is to deny wealth to Qasem Soleimani and to Rouhani and Zarif so that they can commit terror. They’re the world’s largest state sponsor of terror – so that they don’t have the wealth and resources to commit terror acts all around the world, including their assassination campaign in the heart of Europe. QUESTION: Now, I can’t have the Secretary of State in front of me today without asking, even though I know that the building of the wall is not in your ministry, but falls under the department of home security, and I know that you support it, but do you think it’s justified to declare an emergency to get the money for it? SECRETARY POMPEO: Absolutely. QUESTION: That’s a clear answer. Is it round-up? MR PALLADINO: We’re done. We’ve got to wrap it up. (Break.) QUESTION: That’s the thing. You’ve been Secretary of State for a year. If everything goes to plan, you have two more years. We live in interesting times, to put it mildly. What are your priorities? Like what do you want to have achieved in two years’ time? You don’t change the world, but where do you want to be in two years’ time? SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, so three things. One, I lead a big organization, the United States Department of State. I want to make sure that team is ready and capable of delivering American diplomacy in every corner of the world in a professional way long after I’m gone, so I spend a lot of time building out the team and working to make the State Department effective and great partners for countries like Iceland. Second, President Trump is very focused on the issue of nuclear proliferation and the risk that nuclear weapons pose to the world. In a couple weeks he will travel – I’ll go along with him – to Hanoi, where he will again meet with Chairman Kim Jong-un, and I hope we can make a material decrease in the risk that his – that Kim Jong-un’s nuclear weapons pose to the world. The final thing is we want to make sure that international institutions are fit to function. Many of these – NATO, the IMF – lots of international institutions were built decades ago, and President Trump is committed to making sure we ask the question, do they still work? Where they do, United States is incredibly supportive; where they don’t, we want to fix them. We want to make sure that the set of rules was in place, that the goals that those institutions were created for, the problems they were intended to solve are actually the problems that they’re working on effectively. And if we can do that, if I can be a small part of helping that take place, I’ll think – I’ll have considered my time as the Secretary of State a success. QUESTION: Thank you very much for being with us. SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you very much, ma’am. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor: Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO): DRL Addressing Early and Forced Marriage in Morocco 02/20/2019 You are subscribed to Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor: Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO): DRL Addressing Early and Forced Marriage in Morocco 02/20/2019 07:28 AM EST February 19, 2019 United States Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):  DRL Addressing Early and Forced Marriage in Morocco This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0005569 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 19.345 Type of Solicitation: Public Solicitation Application Deadline: Friday, April 12, 2019 by 11:59PM (EST) Funding Floor (lowest $$ value): $250,000 Funding Ceiling (highest $$ value): $750,000 Anticipated Number of Awards: 1-3 Type of Award: Grant or Cooperative Agreement Period of Performance (example 12-18 months, 2 -5 years): 1.5-4 years Anticipated Time to Award (pending availability of funds): 5-9 months A. Project Description The U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications for projects that promote rule of law and advance the equal status and participation of women and girls in public life. DRL's goal is to support rule of law in Morocco. DRL's objective is to promote equality and accountability in Morocco by ensuring implementation of and advocacy for legal frameworks restricting early and forced marriage. Program approaches may include, but are not limited to: supporting increased government and civil society understanding of national and international laws against early and forced marriage and coordination to improve enforcement; efforts to ensure that national legal frameworks are in line with international human rights standards, including advocacy initiatives to eliminate exceptions that grant judges authority to sanction early marriages; engaging influential community leaders to increase awareness of the issue; and social norm change efforts to shift attitudes that perpetuate the practice both de jure and de facto. The proposed program should include consultative discussions with relevant parties to ensure a participatory and needs-based approach. The proposed program also must address how it will ensure coordination with existing efforts to combat early and forced marriage in Morocco. Proposals that include activities that address potential linkages between early and forced marriage and trafficking in persons are welcome. All proposals must demonstrate that they do not duplicate existing efforts. Applicants should clearly describe how they will engage Moroccan experts and institutional partners. DRL strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of commitment if partners are identified in the proposal. For all programs, projects should aim to have impact that leads to reforms and should have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources. DRL’s preference is to avoid duplicating past efforts by supporting new and creative approaches. This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way. Programs should seek to include groups that can bring perspectives based on their religion, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, and/or sexual orientation and gender identity. Programs should demand-driven and locally led to the extent possible. DRL also requires all of its programming to be non-discriminatory and expects implementers to include strategies for integration of individuals/organizations regardless of religion, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, and/or sexual orientation and gender identity. Where appropriate, competitive proposals may include: Opportunities for beneficiaries to apply their new knowledge and skills in practical efforts. Solicitation of feedback and suggestions from beneficiaries when developing activities in order to strengthen the sustainability of programs and participant ownership of project outcomes. Input from participants on sustainability plans and systematic review of the plans throughout the life of the project with adjustments made as necessary. Inclusion of vulnerable populations in needs and/or rapid assessments in order to identify challenges, gaps, and opportunities among these groups. Joint identification and definition of key concepts with relevant stakeholders and stakeholder input into project activities. Systematic follow up with beneficiaries at specific intervals (3 months, 6 months, etc.) after the completion of activities to track how beneficiaries are retaining new knowledge as well as applying their new skills. Activities that are not typically allowed include, but are not limited to: The provision of humanitarian assistance; English language instruction; Development of high-tech computer or communications software and/or hardware; Purely academic exchanges or fellowships; External exchanges or fellowships lasting longer than six months; Off-shore activities that are not clearly linked to in-country initiatives and impact or are not necessary per security concerns; Theoretical explorations of human rights or democracy issues, including projects aimed primarily at research and evaluation that do not incorporate training or capacity-building for local civil society; Micro-loans or similar small business development initiatives; Initiatives directed towards a diaspora community rather than current residents of targeted countries. B. Federal Award Information Primary organizations can submit one application in response to the NOFO. The U.S. government may (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept other than the lowest cost application, (c) accept more than one application, and (d) waive irregularities in applications received. The U.S. government may make award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions or negotiations. Therefore, each initial application should contain the applicant's best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. The U.S. government reserves the right (though it is under no obligation to do so), however, to enter into discussions with one or more applicants in order to obtain clarifications, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the project description, budget, or other aspects of an application. DRL anticipates awarding either a grant or cooperative agreement depending on the needs and risk factors of the program. The final determination on award mechanism will be made by the Grants Officer. The distinction between grants and cooperative agreements revolves around the existence of “substantial involvement.” Cooperative agreements require greater Federal government participation in the project. If a cooperative agreement is awarded, DRL will undertake reasonable and programmatically necessary substantial involvement. Examples of substantial involvement can include, but are not limited to: Active participation or collaboration with the recipient in the implementation of the award. Review and approval of one stage of work before another can begin. Review and approval of substantive provisions of proposed subawards or contracts. Approval of the recipient’s budget or plan of work prior to the award. The authority for this funding opportunity is found in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA). To maximize the impact and sustainability of the award(s) that result from this NOFO, DRL retains the right to execute non-competitive continuation amendment(s). The total duration of any award, including potential non-competitive continuation amendments, shall not exceed 60 months or five years. Any non-competitive continuation is contingent on performance and pending availability of funds. A non-competitive continuation is not guaranteed and the Department of State reserves the right to exercise or not to exercise this option. DRL may require successful applicant(s) to incorporate coordination of an implementer and stakeholder meeting into the Scope of Work of the final project. DRL will discuss this possibility with particular applicant(s) during the proposal negotiation phase and may include, but not limited to the following: Additional funding to cover cost of the stakeholder meeting; Coordinating all logistics and hosting the meeting; Assisting applicants with visas; Drafting the agenda in coordination with DRL; Preparing all materials for the meeting; Securing outside speakers for the conference; and Hosting a networking event outside of the meeting space. C. Eligibility Information For application information, please see the proposal submission instructions (PSI) on our website. C.1 Eligible Applicants DRL welcomes applications from U.S.-based and foreign-based non-profit organizations/nongovernment organizations (NGO) and public international organizations; private, public, or state institutions of higher education; and for-profit organizations or businesses. DRL’s preference is to work with non-profit entities; however, there may be some occasions when a for-profit entity is best suited. Applications submitted by for-profit entities may be subject to additional review following the panel selection process. Additionally, the Department of State prohibits profit to for-profit or commercial organizations under its assistance awards. Profit is defined as any amount in excess of allowable direct and indirect costs. The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 30, Cost Accounting Standards Administration, and 48 CFR 31 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures. Please see 2 CFR 200.307 for regulations regarding program income. C.2 Cost Sharing or Matching Providing cost sharing, matching, or cost participation is not an eligibility factor or requirement for this NOFO, and providing cost share will not result in a more favorable competitive ranking. C.3 Other Applicants should have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with thematic or in-country partners, entities, and relevant stakeholders, including private sector partners and NGOs, and have demonstrable experience in administering successful and preferably similar projects. DRL encourages applications from foreign-based NGOs headquartered in the geographic regions/countries relevant to this NOFO. Applicants may form consortia in order to bring together organizations with varied expertise to propose a comprehensive program in one proposal. However, one organization should be designated in the proposal as the lead applicant, with the other members designated as sub-award partners. DRL reserves the right to request additional background information on applicants that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards, and these applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis. DRL is committed to an anti-discrimination policy in all of its projects and activities. DRL welcomes applications irrespective of race, ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or other status. Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM)(www.sam.gov) and/or has a current debt to the United Stated Government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR,1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR,1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award. All applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their application. D. Application and Submission Information D.1 Address to Request Application Package Applicants can find application forms, kits, or other materials needed to apply on www.grants.gov and SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) under the announcement title “DRL Addressing Early and Forced Marriage in Morocco” funding opportunity number “SFOP0005569”. Please contact the DRL point of contact listed in Section G if requesting reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities or for security reasons. Please note that reasonable accommodations do not include deadline extensions. D.2 Content and Form of Application Submission For all application documents, please ensure: All documents are in English and all costs are in U.S. dollars. If an original document within the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided (please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires that English is the official language of all award documents. If any document is provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is the controlling version); All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments; All documents are formatted to 8 ½ x 11 paper; and, All documents are single-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins. Captions and footnotes may be 10-point Times New Roman font. Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit within 1 page width. D.2.1 Application Requirements Complete applications must include the following: Completed and signed SF-424, SF-424A, and SF-424B forms. Please see SF-424 instructions in Section 2B of the PSI. If your organization engages in lobbying the U.S. government, including Congress, or pays another entity to lobby on your behalf, the SF-LLL“Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” form is also required (only if applicable). Please see SF-LLL guidance in Section 2B of the PSI. Cover Page (not to exceed one [1] page, preferably as a Word Document) that includes a table with the organization name, project title, target country/countries, project synopsis, and name and contact information for the application’s main point of contact. Please see Cover Page section 2C of the PSI for a template and more details. Executive Summary (not to exceed one [1] page, preferably as a Word Document) that outlines project goals, objectives, activities, etc. Table of Contents (not to exceed one [1] page, preferably as a Word Document) listing all documents and attachments with page numbers. Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten [10] pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please note the ten-page limit does not include the Cover Page, Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative, Audit, or NICRA. Applicants are encouraged to combine multiple documents in a single Word Document or PDF (i.e. Cover Page, Table of Contents, Executive Summary, and Proposal Narrative in one file). Please see Proposal Narrative Guidelines in Section 2E of the PSI for more details. DRL requests a Proposal Narrative that demonstrates the Applicant’s commitment to ensuring the participation of all people as a strategy for implementation. Please integrate inclusion strategies in all sections of the Proposal Narrative to enhance programmatic impact. Budget (preferably as an Excel workbook) that includes three [3] columns containing the request to DRL, any cost sharing contribution, and the total budget. A summary budget should also be included using the OMB-approved budget categories (see SF-424A as a sample) in a separate tab. Costs must be in U.S. dollars. Detailed line-item budgets for subgrantees should be included as additional tabs within the Excel workbook (if available at the time of submission). Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2F of the PSI for more information. DRL requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies. Please include costs associated with this commitment in the budget and budget narrative. Budget Narrative (preferably as a Word Document) that includes substantive explanations and justifications for each line-item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and a description of all cost-share offered. Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2F of the PSI for more information. Your organization’s most recent audit, if applicable. This should be a single audit, program-specific audit, or other audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). Please see Audit Section 2G of the PSI for more information. Logic Model (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Logic ModelSection 2H of the PSI for more information. Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative (not to exceed four [4] pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please see Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative Section 2I of the PSI for more information. As stated within the DRL Guide to Program Monitoring and Evaluation (p. 6): DRL strongly encourages applicants to consider whether their monitoring and evaluation systems are utilizing human rights-based approaches, applying a gender and equity lens, or include the participation of sub-grantees and project participants. Within the Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative, applicants should demonstrate their commitment to inclusive strategies and consider whether evaluation design, data collection, analysis, reporting and learning are conducted in an ethical and responsible way with all project participants (e.g. direct beneficiaries, sub-grantees). Applicants should still make adequate provisions to protect the privacy of human subjects when collecting data from individuals. For instance, when collecting data from project participants, consider whether your organization will have the necessary informed consent forms, confidentiality agreements, and data security protocols. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet). Please see Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Section 2I of the PSI for more information. Risk Analysis (preferably as a Word Document). Please see Risk Analysis Section 2J of the PSI for more information. Key Personnel (not to exceed two [2] pages, preferably as a Word Document). Please include short bios that highlight relevant professional experience. Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission. Timeline (not to exceed one [1] page, preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet). The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout. Security Plan addressing any issues involving in-person events and recruitment for said events, and safety for any online programs or communications, including independent IT security audits (to include a vulnerability assessment) of any proposed web application or platform. Organization’s security plan should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment. Costs may also be identified within the budget and budget narrative. Applicants are also encouraged to include contingency plans for in-person or online activities.  Contingency Plan for proposed activities should the originally planned activities not be able to be implemented. The contingency plan should be submitted as an additional annex. Applicants should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment and include specific alternative activities or locations as part of the contingency plan. Any proposed “plan” must comply with 2CFR200.433 – Contingency provisions. Plans must not include unallocable or unallowable expenses, and must not result in a larger Total Award Value than the identified as the “competition ceiling”. DRL/GP requires prior approval by the Grants Officer of the “plan” before any activities can take place, or costs can be incurred against the “plan Lessons Learned (not to exceed one [1] page, preferably as a Word Document) from past programs (insert country or theme) that demonstrate how the implementer has safely operated and responded to programmatic challenges, learning from both successes and failures, in the operating environment. To be incorporated into the ten [10] pages allowed for “Proposal Narrative.” Applications that do not include the elements listed above will be deemed technically ineligible. D.2.2 Additional Application Documents Strong applications will also contain the following: Individual Letters of Support and/or Memorandum of Understanding. Letters of support and MOUs must be specific to the project implementation (e.g. from proposed partners or sub-award recipients) and will not count towards the page limit. Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions on DRL’s website for detailed guidance on the documents above: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/286844.pdf. For an application checklist and sample templates please see the Resources page on DRL’s website: http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/c72333.htm. The sample templates provided on the DRL website are suggested, but not mandatory. DRL reserves the right to request additional documents not included in this NOFO. Additionally, to ensure that all applications receive a balanced evaluation, the DRL Review Panel will review from the first page of each section up to the page limit and no further. Note: If ultimately provided with a notification of non-binding intent to make a Federal award, applicants typically have two to three weeks to provide additional information and documents requested in the notification of intent. The deadlines may vary in each notification of intent and applicants must adhere to the stated deadline in the notification of intent. D.2.3 Additional Information Requested For Those Receiving Notification of Intent Successful applicants must submit after notification of intent to make a Federal award, but prior to issuance of a Federal award: Written responses and revised application documents addressing conditions and recommendations from the DRL Review Panel; If your organization has a NICRA and includes NICRA charges in the budget, your latest NICRA as a PDF file; Completion of the Department’s Financial Management Survey, if receiving DRL funding for the first time; Submission of required documents to register in the Payment Management System managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, if receiving DRL funding for the first time (unless an exemption is provided); and, Other requested information or documents included in the notification of intent to make a Federal award or subsequent communications prior to issuance of a Federal award. D.3 Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM) All prime organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), formerly referred to as DUNS, and an active registration with the SAM.gov before submitting an application. DRL may not review applications from or make awards to applicants that have not completed all applicable UEI and SAM.gov requirements. A UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards. Note: The process of obtaining a SAM.gov registration may take anywhere from 4-8 weeks. Please begin your registration as early as possible. If you are based in the United States or pay employees within the United States, prior to registering in SAM.gov you will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code. If you are based outside of the United States and do not pay employees within the United States, you do not need an EIN from the IRS. However, you will need a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code before you can have an active registration in SAM.gov. All prime organizations must also continue to maintain active SAM.gov registration with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or application under consideration by a Federal award agency. SAM.gov requires all entities to renew their registration once a year in order to maintain an active registration status in SAM. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure it has an active registration in SAM.gov and to maintain that active registration. If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements at the time of application, the applicant may be deemed unqualified to receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant. For further guidance on the registration process, please see the SAM.gov Registration Guide on DRL’s website: http://www.state.gov/j/drl/p/c72333.htm. Please refer to 2 CFR 25.200 for additional information. Also, please refer to Section D.5 - Funding Restriction of the NOFO. Note: SAM.gov is not the same as SAMS Domestic. It is free to register inboth systems, but the registration processes are different. In October 2017, new information was added to the www.SAM.gov website to help international registrations, including “Quick Start Guide for International Registrations” and “Helpful Hints.” Navigate to SAM.gov, click HELP in the top navigation bar, then click International Registrants in the left navigation panel. Please note, guidance on SAM.gov and the guidance on GSA’s website about requirement for registering in SAM.gov is subject to change. Applicants should review the website for the most up-to-date guidance. D.3.1 Exemptions An exemption from these requirements may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if: An applicant’s identity must be protected due to potential endangerment of their mission, their organization’s status, their employees, or individuals being served by the applicant. ** Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least two weeks prior to the deadline in the NOFO providing a justification of their request. Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted Grant Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review. ** Note: Foreign organizations will be required to register with the NATO Support Agency (NSPA) to receive a NCAGE code in order to register in SAM.gov. NSPA will forward your registration request to the applicable National Codification Bureau (NCB) if your organization is located in a NATO or Tier 2 Sponsored Non-NATO Nation. As of March 2016, NATO nations included Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, and the United States of America; and Tier 2 nations included Australia, Austria, Brazil, Finland, Israel, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Morocco, New Zealand, Serbia, and Singapore. NSPA and/or the appropriate NCB forwards all NCAGE code information to all Allied Committee 135 (AC/135) nations, which as of March 2016 also included Afghanistan, Argentina, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Montenegro, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, and the United Arab Emirates. All organizations are strongly advised to take this into consideration when assessing whether registration may result in possible endangerment. D.4 Submission Dates and Times Applications are due no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), on Friday, April 12, 2019 by 11:59 PM (EST) on www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) under the announcement title “DRL Addressing Early and Forced Marriage in Morocco” funding opportunity number “SFOP0005569.” Grants.gov and SAMS Domestic automatically log the date and time an application submission is made, and the Department of State will use this information to determine whether an application has been submitted on time. Late applications are neither reviewed nor considered unless the DRL point of contact listed in Section G is contacted prior to the deadline and is provided with evidence of system errors caused by www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) that is outside of the applicant’s control and is the sole reason for a late submission. Applicants should not expect a notification upon DRL receiving their application. D.5 Funding Restrictions DRL will not consider applications that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization. Please refer the link for Foreign Terrorist Organizations: https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm Project activities whose direct beneficiaries are foreign militaries or paramilitary groups or individuals will not be considered for DRL funding given purpose limitations on funding. The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. Per 22 USC §2378d(a) (2015), “No assistance shall be furnished under this chapter [FOREIGN ASSISTANCE] or the Arms Export Control Act [22 USC 2751 et seq.] to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.” Restrictions may apply to any proposed assistance to police or other law enforcement. Among these, pursuant to section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), no assistance provided through this funding opportunity may be furnished to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country when there is credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. In accordance with the requirements of section 620M of the FAA, also known as the Leahy law, project beneficiaries or participants from a foreign government’s security forces may need to be vetted by the Department before the provision of any assistance. If a proposed grant or cooperative agreement will provide assistance to foreign security forces or personnel, compliance with the Leahy Law is required. Federal awards generally will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs; however, the Grants Officer may approve pre-award costs on a case-by-case basis. Generally, construction costs are not allowed under DRL awards. For additional information, please see the DRL Proposal Submission Instructions for Applications Updated October 2018: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/286844.pdf. D.6 Application Submission All application submissions must be made electronically via www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com). Both systems require registration by the applying organization. Please note: the Grants.gov registration process can take ten [10] business days or longer, even if all registration steps are completed in a timely manner. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that it has an active registration in SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov. Applicants are required to document that the application has been received by SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov in its entirety. DRL bears no responsibility for disqualification that result from applicants not being registered before the due date, for system errors in either SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov, or other errors in the application process. Additionally you mustsave a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully. Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will not be accepted. Reasonable accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with disabilities or for security reasons. Applicants must follow all formatting instructions in the applicable NOFO and these instructions. DRL encourages organizations to submit applications during normal business hours (Monday – Friday, 9:00a.m. - 5:00p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST)). If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted the appropriate helpdesk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g. if you have not received a response within 48 hours of contacting the helpdesk), you may contact the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO in Section G. The point of contact may assist in contacting the appropriate helpdesk, but an applicant should also document their efforts in contacting the helpdesk. Applicants may also contact the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO if experiencing technical issues with Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic that may result in a late submission. Applicants experiencing technical difficulties should follow these three steps: Contact the helpdesk for either Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic immediately. Document (including screenshots) technical issues AND efforts to contact the helpdesk. Submit all of the required documents to the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO before the deadline. Note: The Procurement Office/Grant Office will determine technical eligibility of all applications. SAMS Domestic Applications: Applicants using SAMS Domestic for the first time should complete their “New Organization Registration.” To register with SAMS Domestic, click “Login to https://mygrants.service-now.com” and follow the “create an account” link. Organizations must remember to save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully. SAMS Domestic Help Desk:  For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at 1-888-313-4567 (toll charges for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://afsitsm.service-now.com/ilms/home. Customer Support is available 24/7/365. Grants.gov Applications Applicants who do not submit applications via SAMS Domestic may submit via www.grants.gov. Please be advised that completing all the necessary registration steps for obtaining a username and password from Grants.gov can take more than two [2] weeks. Please refer to the Grants.gov website for definitions of various "application statuses" and the difference between a submission receipt and a submission validation. Applicants will receive a validation e-mail from Grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. Validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days. Additionally you mustremember to save a screenshot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully. Grants.gov Helpdesk: For assistance with Grants.gov, please call the Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or email support@grants.gov. The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays. See https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/ for a list of federal holidays. E. Application Review Information E.1 Proposal Review Criteria The DRL Review Panel will evaluate each application individually against the following criteria, listed below in order of importance, and not against competing applications. Please use the below criteria as a reference, but do not structure your application according to the sub-sections. Quality of Project Idea Applications should be responsive to the program framework and policy objectives identified in the NOFO, appropriate in the country/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to DRL’s mission of promoting human rights and democracy. Projects should have the potential to have an immediate impact leading to long-term, sustainable reforms. DRL prefers new approaches that do not duplicate efforts by other entities. This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way. In countries where similar activities are already taking place, an explanation should be provided as to how new activities will not duplicate or merely add to existing activities and how these efforts will be coordinated. Proposals that promote creative approaches to recognized ongoing challenges are highly encouraged. DRL prioritizes project proposals with inclusive approaches for advancing these rights. Project Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives A strong application will include a clear articulation of how the proposed project activities contribute to the overall project objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed. A comprehensive monthly work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization. Objectives should be ambitious yet measurable, results-focused and achievable in a reasonable time frame. A complete application must include a logic model to demonstrate how the project activities will have an impact on its proposed objectives. The logic model should match the objectives, outcomes, key activities, and outputs described in the narrative. Applications should address how the project will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate. If local partners have been identified, DRL strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners. Additionally, applicants should describe the division of labor among the direct applicant and any local partners. If applicable, applications should identify target geographic areas for activities, target participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and the specific roles of sub-awardees, among other pertinent details. DRL recognizes that all programs have some level of risk due to internal/external variables that have the potential to adversely affect a program. Risk management should address how the program design incorporates the identification, assessment, and management of key risk factors. DRL will review the risk analysis based on the organization’s ability to identify risks that could have an impact on the overall program as well as how the organization will manage these risks. Institution’s Record and Capacity DRL will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Applications should demonstrate an institutional record of successful democracy and human rights programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past grants. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the project's objectives. Projects should have potential for continued funding beyond DRL resources. Addressing Barriers to Equal Participation DRL strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of all persons. As the U.S. government’s lead bureau dedicated to promoting democratic governance, DRL requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies. Violence targeting any members of society undermines collective security and threatens democracy. DRL prioritizes inclusive and integrated program models that assess and address the barriers to access for individuals and groups based on their religion, gender, disabilities, ethnicity, or sexual orientation and gender identity. Applicants should describe how programming affects all of its beneficiaries, including support that specifically target these communities facing discrimination, and especially which may be under threat of violence. This approach should be an integral part of both the concept and explicit design of all proposed project activities, objectives, and monitoring. Strong proposals will provide specific analysis, measures, and corresponding targets as appropriate. Stakeholders shall identify the difference between opportunities and barriers to access and design programs that do not perpetuate these inequalities, but rather enhance programmatic impact by including all people in society. The goal of this approach is to bring communities and those in power together in support of stable and secure societies. Cost Effectiveness DRL strongly encourages applicants to clearly demonstrate project cost-effectiveness in their application, including examples of leveraging institutional and other resources. However, cost-sharing or other examples of leveraging other resources are not required. Inclusion of cost-sharing in the budget does not result in additional points awarded during the review process. Budgets should have low and/or reasonable overhead and administration costs, and applicants should provide clear explanations and justifications for these costs in relation to the work involved. All budget items should be clearly explained and justified to demonstrate necessity, appropriateness, and connection to the project objectives. Please note: If cost-share is included in the budget, the recipient must maintain written records to support all allowable costs that are claimed as its contribution to cost-share, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. In the event the recipient does not meet the minimum amount of cost-sharing as stipulated in the recipient’s budget, DRL’s contribution may be reduced in proportion to the recipient’s contribution. Multiplier Effect/Sustainability Applications should clearly delineate how elements of the project will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant. ... [Message clipped]  View entire message ReplyForward