U.S. Department of State Weekly Digest Bulletin

Conversation opened. 1 read message.

Skip to content
Using Gmail with screen readers

Search

Compose

Labels

Inbox

Starred

Snoozed

Important

Sent

Drafts

2

Categories

Social

Updates

Forums

Promotions

INBOX/old

Travel

More

 

Hangouts

 

 

 

More

U.S. Department of State Weekly Digest Bulletin Inbox x U.S. Department of State <usstatebpa@public.govdelivery.com> Sun, Mar 31, 1:47 PM (22 hours ago)  to me Europe and Eurasia: On the Occasion of Greek National Day 03/25/2019 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: On the Occasion of Greek National Day 03/25/2019 09:29 AM EDT Press Statement Michael R. Pompeo Washington, DC March 25, 2019 On behalf of the American people and the Government of the United States of America, I extend best wishes to the people of Greece on the 198th anniversary of your independence. The United States and Greece have enjoyed enduring friendship and cooperation embedded in our shared democratic values and common interests. We work together to promote trade and investment, regional stability and security, and the diversification of energy resources. Our two nations continue to cooperate closely. I had the honor to host Minister of Foreign Affairs George Katrougalos last December, to launch the inaugural U.S.-Greece Strategic Dialogue. The Strategic Dialogue included high-level interagency representation from both countries and built on a year of comprehensive engagement, highlighted the strength of the bilateral relationship, and confirmed the mutual commitment of the United States and Greece to deepen our cooperation. Greece is a valued NATO Ally and together we have made progress over the past year in advancing our common interests. As you celebrate this important occasion, the American people wish you peace, prosperity, and happiness over the coming year. 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: On the Occasion of Greek National Day 03/25/2019 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: On the Occasion of Greek National Day 03/25/2019 09:29 AM EDT Press Statement Michael R. Pompeo Washington, DC March 25, 2019 On behalf of the American people and the Government of the United States of America, I extend best wishes to the people of Greece on the 198th anniversary of your independence. The United States and Greece have enjoyed enduring friendship and cooperation embedded in our shared democratic values and common interests. We work together to promote trade and investment, regional stability and security, and the diversification of energy resources. Our two nations continue to cooperate closely. I had the honor to host Minister of Foreign Affairs George Katrougalos last December, to launch the inaugural U.S.-Greece Strategic Dialogue. The Strategic Dialogue included high-level interagency representation from both countries and built on a year of comprehensive engagement, highlighted the strength of the bilateral relationship, and confirmed the mutual commitment of the United States and Greece to deepen our cooperation. Greece is a valued NATO Ally and together we have made progress over the past year in advancing our common interests. As you celebrate this important occasion, the American people wish you peace, prosperity, and happiness over the coming year. 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. Speeches: The Biggest Challenge of Our Time? 03/25/2019 You are subscribed to Speeches, Remarks, Testimony (other than by the Secretary) for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Speeches: The Biggest Challenge of Our Time? 03/25/2019 09:49 AM EDT Remarks Andrew Veprek MCC Budapest Summit on Migration Budapest, Hungary March 24, 2019 FILLING THE LAW-SHAPED HOLE IN “MIGRATION” Thank you for that introduction, and thank you, Mr. Minister, for your remarks. Many thanks to also to the conference organizers and MCC for inviting me and my colleague, Deputy Assistant Secretary Marocco. I am pleased to be here to follow up on Secretary Pompeo’s recent visit. I appreciate the opportunity to address this subject, which is one of great interest to the United States. Faced with the large, often uncontrolled movements of people we see around the world today, many countries – including my own – are seeking to more effectively protect their borders, enforce their immigration laws, and generally ensure that immigration promotes the interests of their citizens. But effective national solutions for migration must begin with clear and informed thinking about problems. Unfortunately, our public discourse about immigration, and thus our thinking, frequently is limited in ways we might not realize or anticipate. Put another way, the way we talk about issues is important. Let’s start with subject of our conference. What do we mean when we talk about “migration?” In fact, there is no universally-accepted definition of the term. Not even the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration, which the United Nations touts as the “first inter-governmentally negotiated agreement, prepared under the auspices of the United Nations, to cover all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner,” defines its subject anywhere in its 34 pages. Nevertheless, we need to start somewhere. The International Organization for Migration is as good a place as any, and they helpfully offer the following working definition. Migration is: the movement of a person or a group of persons, either across an international border, or within a State. It is a population movement, encompassing any kind of movement of people, whatever its length, composition and causes; it includes migration of refugees, displaced persons, economic migrants, and persons moving for other purposes, including family reunification. You will notice that this is an extremely broad definition, sweeping up every conceivable category of human movement: domestic and international, permanent and temporary, forced and voluntary. But missing from this definition, and perhaps in the broader discussion, is the role of law, a key national interest, in movement across international borders. What a strange absence! International borders are the places where different sets of national laws and interests meet and, some might say, collide. They are in fact thick with laws, even if not all of them are enforced, and filled with warnings about where one can and cannot go or what one can and cannot do or carry on one side of the border or the other. This is obvious not only to those of us who work on immigration matters, but anyone who traveled here for this conference from outside of the Schengen zone. So, why is there a law-shaped hole in the term “migration?” We see a similarly ambiguous stance towards lawful immigration in the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration – despite its claim to be based on the principles of national sovereignty and the rule of law. On this, let me pause to recognize and appreciate the several other countries that have opposed or abstained from supporting the Compact, particularly Hungary, which was the first in Europe in this regard, and we appreciate the close cooperation in our effort to oppose the Compact. As you know, the United States did not participate in the negotiation of the Compact, objected to its adoption, and holds that it is not bound by any of the commitments or outcomes stemming from the Compact process or contained in the Compact itself. I will not review the whole of the United States objection to the Compact here – it is available online for those who are interested – but one of our principal substantive concerns was the Compact’s failure to distinguish adequately between foreign nationals who have legal status in host countries and those who are unlawfully present. To take one example, the Compact in paragraph 31(b) encourages what some call “firewalls” for services within governments to protect the privacy of aliens and to eliminate the potential that aliens will avoid services to which they are allegedly entitled out of fear of arrest or detention. It is the view of the United States, however, that information-sharing among relevant departments and levels of government, in accordance with our national laws and policy, is essential to promote the steady enforcement of our laws. Or, as another American official put it, “No great and prosperous nation can have both a generous welfare system and open borders.” But a deep ambiguity about law seems to permeate not only the text of the Compact – it is inherent in the nature and title of the Compact itself. The Compact asserts that it is not legally binding and that it protects the sovereignty of States. However, its supporters had considerably greater ambitions when they launched the process that led to the Compact. We are concerned that they seek to use the Compact as a long-term means of building customary international law, or so-called “soft law,” in the area of migration. Consider the novel use of the term “compact” to describe the document. Unlike standard titles for international instruments, “compact” has no settled meaning in international law, but to some it implies legal obligation. Hence, the Compact is open to claims that its commitments are legal obligations or at least evidence of international consensus on universal legal principles. The United States objects to any such claims and holds that neither the Compact nor any commitments by States to implement its objectives create any legal obligations or create new rights or protections for foreign nationals as a matter of conventional or customary international law. Let’s consider where this leaves us: We are grappling with a global crisis based on a concept – migration -- for which there is no universally-accepted definition. But what we have is limited in one obvious and important respect – the role of law. The instrument that is promoted to address this crisis -- the Global Compact on Migration -- has an ambiguous relationship to law in its substance, form, and intent. Now, I am a diplomat by profession, so I appreciate the constructive uses of silence or ambiguity to cover small differences in the name of reaching agreement on larger points. But as a representative of a sovereign country and someone sworn to defend its Constitution and laws, this is too much. We need to restore what is missing in this discourse. The way we talk about crossing international borders should reflect the centrality of law, and the need for such movements to be in accordance with national laws. For example, in the United States, foreign nationals who are not lawfully present are not “irregular migrants.” They are illegal aliens violating the laws and immigration policies of our nation, and they are subject to arrest, detention, prosecution, and removal. Some will object that this type of language -- “legal” and “illegal” -- is too harsh. But as a former Attorney General of the United States noted, it is perfectly legitimate, moral, and decent for a nation to have a legal system of immigration and to enforce the system it adopts. Within such a system, we can offer protection to those who merit it, legal forms of employment for those who qualify, and opportunities for others to study and visit. In many of our countries, citizens – including those who themselves immigrated from other countries – understand this. They are deeply concerned about the presence of large numbers of illegal aliens. Open and massive law-breaking undercuts citizens’ faith in the ability of their governments to enforce their laws, thus undermining the rule of law. In democratic nations, where governments are responsive and accountable to the people, illegal immigration also hurts the ability of States to consider implementing new forms of legal immigration. Lawful and orderly immigration must therefore start and end with effective national controls over borders, which are rooted in law. Finally, let me say: Emphasizing the law when we talk about immigration is particularly important to those of us who hold positions of public trust or who have the ability to influence the course of public affairs. As President Trump said to the United Nations General Assembly last September: Our government’s first duty is to its people, to our citizens -- to serve their needs, to ensure their safety, to preserve their rights, and to defend their values. If we desire to lift up our citizens…we must fulfill our sovereign duties to the people we faithfully represent. We must protect our nations, their interests, and their futures. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders, and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow. Thank you. 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: On the Occasion of Nowruz  03/25/2019 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: On the Occasion of Nowruz  03/25/2019 02:12 PM EDT Press Statement Michael R. Pompeo Washington, DC March 25, 2019 I would like to wish a Happy Nowruz to the people of Iran, and to everyone who celebrates this ancient tradition that marks the arrival of spring and a New Year, including people in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, China, Georgia, India, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Russia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, the Kurdish people, and their communities in the United States. For millennia, Nowruz has endured as a cornerstone of culture and heritage for many peoples and societies. Nowruz brings family and friends together to reflect on the past while celebrating the future, and is a time for connecting with loved ones both near and far. As Iranians celebrate Nowruz this year, they should be able to have unrestricted access to social media sites to share photos of their holiday gatherings and to send New Year's greetings to loved ones living in other cities or even abroad. The proud Iranian people deserve to enjoy the best of life without fear of repression. May this Nowruz bring new beginnings and a brighter future for everyone! Happy Nowruz! 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 FY18/19 IRF Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA 03/25/2019 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 FY18/19 IRF Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA 03/25/2019 04:35 PM EDT March 25, 2019 United States Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):  DRL FY18/19 IRF Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0005669 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 19.345 Type of Solicitation: Open Application Deadline: 11:30 PM (EST) on Friday, May 3, 2019 Funding Floor: $500,000 Funding Ceiling: $1,000,000 Anticipated Number of Awards: 1-2 Type of Award: Grant or Cooperative Agreement Period of Performance: 24-36 months Anticipated Time to Award (pending availability of funds): 4-6 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 counter the rise of anti-Semitism in OSCE member states in Europe and Central Asia. Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA- EUR/SCA REGIONAL $1,000,000 total DRL anticipates making one-two awards between $500,000-$1,000,000. DRL's goal, in partnership with the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, is to counter the rise of anti-Semitism in OSCE member states in Europe and Central Asia, as manifested through acts of physical violence, desecration of religious sites, religion-based discrimination, and the use of hateful or inflammatory speech in public discourse, traditional media and online. Currently, many governments are not collecting and maintaining aggregated data on hate crimes within their borders, in spite of existing guidelines outlined in OSCE commitments. These guidelines require disaggregating hate crime statistics by demographics that include ethnicity and religion and documenting and reporting on crimes motivated by anti-Semitism. DRL will support one or more projects to counter anti-Semitism by increasing documentation and reporting on hate crimes, promoting greater societal inclusion and increasing public awareness of ways to combat hateful and discriminatory expression targeting Jews. Efforts to increase reporting should also include training law enforcement to adequately and holistically respond to hate crimes from a legal, social, and community perspective; and to better equip police and prosecutors to engage effectively with local Jewish populations. “Religious freedom” refers to the rights contained in Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the freedom to adopt a religion or beliefs, change your beliefs, express your beliefs (including through publications, public and private speech, and the display of religious attire or symbols), gather with others who share your beliefs, construct places of worship, and teach your beliefs to your children. Proposed programming must be responsive to restrictions on religious freedom, and must be in line with the U.S. Government’s religious freedom, democracy, governance, and human rights goals. Helpful resources for applicants include the annual country-specific International Religious Freedom Reports https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/ and annual country-specific Human Rights Reports https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/. Applicants will be responsible for ensuring program activities and products comply with the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. Program activities may include but are not limited to: Advocating for governments to collect data and report anti-Semitic crimes in compliance with existing OSCE commitments. Reports should include disaggregating hate crime statistics by demographics that include ethnicity and religion as stipulated in the commitments; Reporting on crimes motivated by anti-Semitism to national agencies and international governance organizations such as the OSCE, European Commission, Council of Europe bodies, International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA); Increasing the capacity of law enforcement, judiciary, civil servants and policymakers to identify, respond, and report on anti-Semitic crimes and other security concerns expressed by Jewish communities from a legal, social, and community level; Establishing protocol, processes, or procedures for law enforcement to respond to anti-Semitic hate crimes incorporating legal, social and community perspectives; Offering opportunities for relationship building between Jewish communities, law enforcement and civic leaders to increase reporting and responsivity; Increasing awareness of hate crimes using gathered statistics to advocate governments, national agencies or international governance organizations to take appropriate action to counter anti-Semitism; Increasing public awareness of the threat posed by anti-Semitism (including Holocaust denial and distortion) to broader societal stability using data gathered from reporting. 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. 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 (1) application in response to the NOFO. Organizations may be proposed as subgrantees for more than one application. 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 FY18/19 IRF Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA” funding opportunity number “SFOP0005669.” 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. 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 11:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), on Friday, May 3, 2019 on www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) under the announcement title “DRL FY18/19 IRF Combatting Anti-Semitism in EUR and SCA,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0005669.” 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. In accordance with Department of State policy for terrorism, applicants are advised that successful passing of vetting to evaluate the risk that funds may benefit terrorists or their supporters is a condition of award. If chosen for an award, applicants will be asked to submit information required by DS Form 4184, Risk Analysis Information (attached to this solicitation) about their company and its principal personnel. Vetting information is also required for all sub-award performance on assistance awards identified by the Department of State as presenting a risk of terrorist financing. Vetting information may also be requested for project beneficiaries and participants. Failure to submit information when requested, or failure to pass vetting, may be grounds for rejecting your proposal prior to award. 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, 9:00AM - 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. A good multiplier effect will have an impact beyond the direct beneficiaries of the grant (e.g. participants trained under a grant go on to train other people; workshop participants use skills from a workshop to enhance a national level election that affects the entire populace). A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating continuing impact beyond the life of a project or garnering other donor support after DRL funding ceases. Project Monitoring and Evaluation Complete applications will include a detailed M&E Narrative and M&E Plan, which detail how the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated. Incorporating well-designed monitoring and evaluation processes into a project is an efficient method for documenting the change (intended and unintended) that a project seeks. Applications should demonstrate the capacity to provide objectives with measurable outputs and outcomes. The quality of the M&E sections will be judged on the narrative explaining how both monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for those related activities. The M&E Narrative should explain how an external evaluation will be incorporated into the project implementation plan or how the project will be systematically assessed in the absence of one. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the narrative. The output and outcome-based performance indicators should not only be separated by project objectives but also should match the objectives, outcomes, and outputs detailed in the logic model and proposal narrative. Performance indicators should be clearly defined (i.e., explained how the indicators will be measured and reported) either within the table or with a separate Performance Indicator Reference Sheet (PIRS). For each performance indicator, the table should also include baselines and quarterly and cumulative targets, data collection tools, data sources, types of data disaggregation, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation. There should also be metrics to capture how project activities target those discriminated against or marginalized populations or addresses their concerns, where applicable. Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the plan. E.2 Review and Selection Process DRL strives to ensure that each application receives a balanced evaluation by a DRL Review Panel. The Department’s Office of Acquisitions Management (AQM) will determine technical eligibility for all applications. All technically eligible applications for a given NOFO are reviewed against the same seven criteria, which include quality of project idea, project planning/ability to achieve objectives, institutional record and capacity, inclusive programming, cost effectiveness, multiplier effect/sustainability, and project monitoring and evaluation. Additionally, the DRL Review Panel will evaluate how the application addresses the NOFO request, U.S. foreign policy goals, and the priority needs of DRL overall. DRL may also take into consideration the balance of the current portfolio of active projects, including geographic or thematic diversity, if needed. In most cases, the DRL Review Panel includes representatives from DRL, the appropriate Department of State regional bureau (to include feedback from U.S. embassies), and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (to include feedback from USAID missions). In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that are in a public-private partnership with DRL. At the end of the panel’s discussion about an application, the Panel votes on recommending the application for approval by the DRL Assistant Secretary. If more applications are ultimately recommended for approval than DRL can fund, the Panel will rank the recommended applications in priority order for consideration by the DRL Assistant Secretary. The Grants Officer Representative (GOR) for the eventual award does not vote on the panel. All Panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest agreements. DRL Review Panels may provide conditions and recommendations on applications to enhance the proposed project, which must be addressed by the applicant before further consideration of the award. To ensure effective use of DRL funds, conditions or recommendations may include requests to increase, decrease, clarify, and/or justify costs and project activities. F. Federal Award Administration Information F.1 Federal Award Notices DRL will provide a separate notification to applicants on the result of their applications. Successful applicants will receive a letter electronically via email requesting that the applicant respond to Panel conditions and recommendations. This notification is not an authorization to begin activities and does not constitute formal approval or a funding commitment. Final approval is contingent on the applicant successfully responding to the Panel’s conditions and recommendations, being registered in required systems, including the U.S. government’s Payment Management System (PMS), unless an exemption is provided, and completing and providing any additional documentation requested by DRL or AQM. Final approval is also contingent on Congressional notification requirements being met and final review and approval by the Department’s warranted Grants Officer. The notice of Federal award signed by the Department’s warranted Grants Officers is the sole authorizing document. If awarded, the notice of Federal award will be provided to the applicant’s designated Authorizing Official via SAMS Domestic to be electronically counter-signed in the system. F.2 Administrative and National Policy and Legal Requirements DRL requires all recipients of foreign assistance funding to comply with all applicable Department and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to the following: The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR Chapter 200 (Sub-Chapters A through F) shall apply to all non-Federal entities, except for assistance awards to Individuals and Foreign Public Entities. Sub-Chapters A through E shall apply to all foreign organizations, and Sub-Chapters A through D shall apply to all U.S. and foreign for-profit entities. The applicant/recipient of the award and any sub-recipient under the award must comply with all applicable terms and conditions, in addition to the assurance and certifications made part of the Notice of Award. The Department’s Standard Terms and Conditions can be viewed athttps://www.state.gov/m/a/ope/index.htm. Additionally, DRL supports implementation of the Women Peace and Security Act of 2017, which highlights the U.S. commitment to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution. For additional information, please refer to the link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1141 Additional requirements may be included depending on the content of the program. F.3 Reporting Applicants should be aware that DRL awards will require that all reports (financial and progress) are uploaded to the grant file in SAMS Domestic on a quarterly basis. The Federal Financial Report (FFR or SF-425) is the required form for the financial reports and must be submitted in PMS, as well as a copy from PMS then uploaded to the grant file in SAMS Domestic. The progress reports uploaded to the grant file in SAMS Domestic must include a narrative as described below and Project Indicators (or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer) for the F Framework indicators. The F Framework indicators will be reviewed and negotiated during the final stages of issuing an award. Narrative progress reports should reflect the focus on measuring the project’s impact on the overarching objectives and should be compiled according to the objectives, outcomes, and outputs as outlined in the award’s Scope of Work (SOW) and in the Monitoring & Evaluation Narrative. An assessment of the overall project’s impact should be included in each progress report. Where relevant, progress reports should include the following sections: Relevant contextual information (limited); Explanation and evaluation of significant activities of the reporting period and how the activities reflect progress toward achieving objectives, including meeting benchmarks/targets as set in the M&E plan. In addition, attach the M&E Plan, comparing the target and actual numbers for the indicators; Any tangible impact or success stories from the project, when possible; Copy of mid-term and/or final evaluation report(s) conducted by an external evaluator; if applicable; Relevant supporting documentation or products related to the project activities (such as articles, meeting lists and agendas, participant surveys, photos, manuals, etc.) as separate attachments; Description of how the Recipient is pursuing sustainability, including looking for sources of follow-on funding; Any problems/challenges in implementing the project and a corrective action plan with an updated timeline of activities; Reasons why established goals were not met; Data for the required F Framework indicator(s) for the quarter as well as aggregate data by fiscal year: Program Indicators or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer; Proposed activities for the next quarter; and, Additional pertinent information, including analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs, if applicable. A final narrative and financial report must also be submitted within 90 days after the expiration of the award. Please note: Delays in reporting may result in delays of payment approvals and failure to provide required reports may jeopardize the recipient's’ ability to receive future U.S. government funds. DRL reserves the right to request any additional programmatic and/or financial project information during the award period. G. Contact Information For technical submission questions related to this NOFO, please contact DRLIRFGrants@state.gov. 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. Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA). If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the helpdesk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC. For assistance with Grants.gov accounts and technical issues related to using the system, 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. For a list of federal holidays visit: https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/snow-dismissal-procedures/federal-holidays/ With the exception of technical submission questions, during the NOFO period U.S. Department of State staff in Washington and overseas shall not discuss this competition with applicants until the entire proposal review process has been completed and rejection and approval letters have been transmitted. H. Other Information Applicants should be aware that DRL understands that some information contained in applications may be considered sensitive or proprietary and will make appropriate efforts to protect such information. However, applicants are advised that DRL cannot guarantee that such information will not be disclosed, including pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or other similar statutes. The information in this NOFO and “DRL’s Proposal Submission Instructions for Applications Updated October 2018” is binding and may not be modified by any DRL representative. Explanatory information provided by DRL that contradicts this language will not be binding. Issuance of the NOFO and negotiation of applications does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government. DRL reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets. This NOFO will appear on www.grants.gov, ... [Message clipped]  View entire message ReplyForward