The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) is offering this grant to advance Democracy and Governance Initiatives in Iraq

* Be a non-profit organization meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 USC 501(c) (3).

* Be a U.S. university or research institution meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 USC 501(c) (3); and

* Have demonstrated experience administering successful projects, preferably in Iraq, or similarly challenging program environment. DRL reserves the right to request additional background information on organizations that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards. These applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis; and

* Have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with organization(s) in Iraq.

* Organizations may form consortia and submit a combined proposal. However, one organization should be designated as the lead applicant.

Facilitate reconciliation between Iraqi communities emerging from sectarian and/or other types of conflict.
Promote networks for conflict resolution among Iraq’s various ethnic and religious communities at the local and national levels.
Promote partnerships and otherwise strengthen collaboration with Iraq’s cultural sector to foster the healthy expression of Iraqi unity and national identity.
Promote the effective operation, inclusive growth, and sophistication of Iraq’s political parties.
Increase the transparency and responsiveness of Iraqi deliberative and legislative processes.
Increase Iraqi citizens’ awareness of their civic rights, roles, and responsibilities, including but not limited to civic education networks.
Develop non-partisan civic watchdog bodies, or otherwise increase the capacity of indigenous civil society organizations to hold their governmental and legislative officials accountable.
Promote freedom of expression and non-violent public dissent.
Continue development of Iraqi media, including for example professionalism, specialization, sustainability, editorial independence, advocacy, and/or management of regulatory relationships.
Increase the connectivity and quality of dialogue among Iraq’s elected officials, political leaders, journalists, and citizenry.
Create conditions and capacities for Iraqi grassroots advocacy organizations to exert influence.
Foster sustainable and independent indigenous civil society advocacy organizations through customized assistance in one or more of the following areas: mission specialization; technical and organizational capacity; financial integrity; strategic planning; communication and outreach; networking and coalition-building; and leadership development.
Increase the influence of Iraqi women in the political arena and/or civic affairs.
Increase the capacity of Iraq’s minority communities to coalesce and advocate effectively for their interests in the political arena and/or civic affairs.
Increase the capacity of Iraqi youth to exercise leadership in the political arena and/or civic affairs.

Order of presentation does not imply order of priority for funding. Proposals to implement programs in one or more provinces are welcome. Proposals addressing interaction of Iraqi citizens with their governmental officials and legislative representatives may be scoped to any or all levels of Iraqi government. Proposals should address in-country coordination with the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, other USG-funded entities and the international community, if applicable.

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
Proposals should conform to DRL’s posted March 2010 Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), available at
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/p/psi_2010/index.htm.

Submissions in response to this RFP must address proposed topics included in this document. Proposals that do not meet the requirements of the announcement and PSI will not be considered.

For all application documents, please ensure:
1) All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments,
2) All documents are formatted to 8 ½ x 11 paper, and
3) All Microsoft Word documents are single-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman font, with a minimum of 1-inch margins.

Complete applications should include the following for proposal submission:

1. Completed and signed SF-424, SF-424a (Budget Summary) and SF424b (Assurances), as directed on grants.gov.

2. Table of Contents (not to exceed one [1] page in Microsoft Word) that includes a page-numbered contents page, including any attachments.

3. Executive Summary (not to exceed one [1] page in Microsoft Word) that includes:
a) the country,
b) name and contact information for the project’s main point of contact,
c) a one-paragraph “statement of work” or synopsis of the program and its expected results,
d) a concise breakdown of the project’s objectives and activities,
e) the total amount of funding requested and program length, and
f) a brief statement on how the project is innovative, sustainable, and will have a demonstrated impact.

4. Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten [10] pages in Microsoft Word). Please note the ten-page limit does not include the Table of Contents, Executive Summary, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative or NICRA. Applicants may submit multiple documents in one Microsoft Word file, i.e., Table of Contents, Executive Summary, Proposal Narrative, and Budget Narrative in one file or as separate, individually submitted files. Submissions should address the four specific criteria (Quality of Program, Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives, Multiplier Effect/Sustainability, and Institution’s Record and Capacity). Details about these criteria are described in the Review Process section below.

5. Budget Narrative (preferably in Microsoft Word) that includes an explanation/justification for each line item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and description of all cost-share offered. For ease of review, it is recommended that applicants order the budget narrative as presented in the detailed budget. Primarily Headquarters- and Field-based personnel costs should include a clarification on the roles and responsibilities of key staff. In addition, it is recommended that budget narratives address the overall cost-effectiveness of the proposal, including any cost-share offered (see below for more information on cost-sharing and cost-effectiveness).

6. Detailed Line-Item Budget (in Microsoft Excel or similar spreadsheet format) that includes three [3] columns including DRL request, any cost sharing contribution, and total budget (see below for more information on budget format). A summary budget should also be included using the OMB approved budget categories (see SF-424 as a sample). See the PSI for more information on budget format. Costs must be in U.S. Dollars.

7. Attachments (not to exceed seven [7] pages total, preferably in Microsoft Word) that include the following in order:
a) Pages 1-2: Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (see PSI for more information on this section).
b) Page 3: Roles and responsibilities of key program personnel with short bios that highlight relevant professional experience. Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission.
c) Page 4: Timeline of the overall proposal. Components should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout.
d) Page 5-7: Additional optional attachments. Attachments may include additionaltimeline information, letters of support, memorandums of understanding/agreement, etc. For applicants with a large number of letters/MOUs, it may be useful to provide a list of the organizations/government agencies that support the program rather than the actual documentation.

8. If your organization has a negotiated indirect cost rate agreement (NICRA) and includes NICRA charges in the budget, your latest NICRA should be sent as a .pdf file. This document will not be reviewed by the panelists, but rather used by program and grant staff if the submission is recommended for funding. Hence, this document does not count against the submission page limitations. If your proposal involves subgrants to organizations charging indirect costs, and those organizations also have a NICRA, please submit the applicable NICRA as a .pdf file (see the PSI for more information on indirect cost rate).

Organizations must also fill out and submit SF-424, SF-424A, and SF-424B forms as directed on www.grants.gov. Please refer to the PSI for directions on how to complete the forms.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

DRL will not consider proposals that reflect any type of support, for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization, whether or not elected members of government.

The bulk of project activities must focus on Iraq and last between 18 and 36 months. U.S.-based activities, study tours, scholarships, or exchange projects will not be deemed competitive. Projects that have a strong academic, research, or conference focus will not be deemed competitive. DRL discourages health, technology, or scientific projects unless they have an explicit component related to the requested program objectives listed above. Projects that focus on commercial law or economic development will also not be rated as competitive.

Awards are contingent on the availability of funds. The Bureau has approximately $48 million in ESF available for grant awards. Grants are expected to range approximately between $2 and $10 million. All awards will support program and administrative costs required to implement the program. DRL anticipates making grant awards in late summer 2010.

REVIEW PROCESS
The Bureau will review all proposals for eligibility. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance of Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final signatory authority for assistance awards resides with the Department’s Grants Officer. DRL and the Grants Office reserve the right to request any additional programmatic and/or financial information regarding the proposal.

Proposals will be funded based on an evaluation of how the proposal meets the solicitation review criteria, U.S. foreign policy objectives, and the priority needs of DRL. A Department of State Review Committee will evaluate proposals submitted under this request. Each proposal will be rated along six criteria, which will be equally weighted. Review criteria will include:

1) Quality of Program Idea
Proposals should be responsive to the solicitation and appropriate in the country/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to the Bureau’s mission of promoting human rights and democracy. The bureau typically does not fund programs that continue an organization’s ongoing work (funded by the Bureau or other sources), but prioritizes innovative, stand-alone programs. 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.

2) Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives
A strong proposal will include a clear articulation of how the proposed program activities contribute to the overall program objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed. A relevant work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization. The work plan should adhere to the program overview and guidelines described above. Objectives should be ambitious, yet measurable and achievable. For complete proposals, applicants should provide a monthly timeline of project activities. Proposals should address how the program will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate. If local partners have been identified, the Bureau 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, proposals should identify focal areas for activities, priority participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and purpose/criteria for sub-grantees, among other pertinent details. In particularly challenging operating environments, proposals should include contingency plans for overcoming potential difficulties in executing the original work plan.

3) Multiplier Effect/Sustainability
Proposals should clearly delineate how elements of their program will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant. A good multiplier effect may include but is not limited to, plans to build lasting networks for direct and indirect beneficiaries, follow-on training and mentoring, and continued use of project deliverables. A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating capacity-building results or garnering other donor support after DRL funding ceases.

4) Program Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan
Programs should demonstrate the capacity for engaging in outcome-based evaluations and identify proscribed outputs and outcomes to measure how program activities will achieve the program’s strategic objectives. The M&E Plan should include output- and outcome-based indicators, baseline and goal for each indicator, disaggregation if applicable, monitoring and evaluation tools, data source, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation. For a more detailed explanation of what DRL is looking for in the M&E Plan, please see the PSI and the DRL Monitoring and Evaluation Primer (www.state.gov/g/drl/p/c12302.htm). Projects that propose an independent evaluation, including a midterm and final assessment, with a clear monitoring and evaluation plan will be viewed favorably in this category.

5) Institution’s Record and Capacity
The Bureau will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful 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. Roles, responsibilities, and brief bios demonstrating relevant professional experience of primary staff should be provided as one of the main attachments.

6) Cost Effectiveness
The overhead and administrative components of the proposal, including salaries and honoraria, should be kept as low as possible. All other items should be necessary and appropriate. Given that the majority of DRL-funded programs take place overseas, U.S.-based costs should be kept to a minimum. Cost sharing is strongly encouraged and is viewed favorably
by DRL reviewers. For a more detailed description of how DRL evaluates the cost effectiveness of its proposals, please see the PSI.

The information contained in this solicitation is binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts this language
will not be binding. Issuance of the solicitation does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program evaluation requirements.