ANNUAL PROGRAM STATEMENT APS-114-15-000003 FOR STRENGTHENING THE ELECTION AND POLITICAL PROCESSES IN GEORGIA THROUGH DIRECT AWARDS TO GEORGIA’S CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS

Table of Contents

SECTION I- PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
A.	PURPOSE
B.	PROBLEM STATEMENT
C.	STRATEGIC FOCUS
D.	OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS
SECTION II – ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
A.       ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
B.       ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS
SECTION III – APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION
A.	APPLICATION PROCESS
B.	CONCEPT PAPER INSTRUCTIONS
C.	FULL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
SECTION IV – APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
A.	EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT PAPERS
B.       EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR FULL APPLICATIONS
C.      OTHER REQUIREMENTS

TIMELINE
Tbilisi Information Session:						May 20, 2015
Concept Paper Deadline: 						June 08, 2015
USAID Response:							August, 2015

SECTION I- PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

A.	PURPOSE

The United States Government, represented by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission in Georgia, requests applications from Georgian non-governmental organizations for projects to strengthen election and political processes in Georgia.   

USAID uses an Annual Program Statement (APS) to generate competition for awards when the Agency intends to support a variety of creative approaches and activities that contribute to the attainment of its strategic objectives. This APS is designed to seek relationships beyond traditional USAID norms by inviting submissions from local organizations, including those who have never received direct funding from USAID. 

The overall goal of USAID’s Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes in Georgia through Direct Awards to Georgia’s Civil Society Organizations APS is to support Georgian groups to mount credible electoral and political process monitoring activities and to inform the public of their recommendations in order to help engage citizens in electoral and political processes in Georgia.  To achieve this goal, USAID intends to issue multiple awards under this APS to applicants who address the following objective: Increase the confidence of Georgian citizens in local and national elections by contributing to increased transparency and accountability of electoral and political processes.

Subject to the availability of funds, USAID intends to provide funding for multiple cooperative agreements worth from $200,000 to $1,500,000 for up to 36 months to support activities related to election and political process monitoring for the upcoming election cycle in Georgia, which includes 2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential elections.  Awards should be structured to cover the 2016 and 2017 election periods, with a possible extension period for 2018 presidential elections; interventions around the 2018 presidential elections should be proposed now, but would not be decided and finalized until a later date.  USAID intends to make all awards to local organizations for the upcoming election cycle prior to the 2016 Parliamentary elections; local organizations should not expect that additional election and political process monitoring awards will be made between 2016 and 2018.

For details on eligibility, see section III- Eligibility Information. For details on the application process, please see Section IV-Application and Submission Information.  The first deadline for concept papers under this APS is June 8, 2015.

B.	PROBLEM STATEMENT

Strong and effective democracies need well-functioning legal frameworks, institutions, systems and processes to ensure government accountability, transparency, and checks and balances.  Citizen participation through elections, monitoring of political processes, and policy advocacy plays a fundamental role in ensuring government accountability and transparency, as well as furthering government legitimacy and effectiveness.  

Georgia’s recent election cycle (2012-2014) was assessed positively by international organizations.  According to the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the 2012 Parliamentary and 2013 Presidential elections “suggest that competitive multi-party elections may be becoming a routine feature of Georgian politics.”  The report of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) on the presidential election of October 2013 stated that the “election was efficiently administered and transparent, and took place in an amicable and constructive environment. During the election campaign, fundamental freedoms of expression, movement, and assembly were respected and candidates were able to campaign without restriction. The media was less polarized than during the 2012 elections and presented a broad range of viewpoints. On election day, voters were able to express their choice freely.”  For the 2014 municipal elections, Georgia successfully mounted both the election day and run-off election without instances of disruption that impacted the outcome of the vote. 

While positive, the gains that have been made in the electoral sphere will continue to be tested.  In recent years, confidence towards the Central Election Commission (CEC) has increased, but in a politicized environment, the CEC must continually demonstrate professionalism, transparency and independence.  The media environment has become less polarized, but it is still subject to political pressure and often bends to the will of political forces, contributing to a charged environment.  To withstand these tests, it is imperative for Georgians to engage in and have access to impartial and responsive domestic election monitoring to ensure that elections in Georgia continue to comply with international standards of fairness and equality.

Compliance with certain standards—related to elections and other democratic, political processes-- is also mandated by Georgia’s aspirations for Euro-Atlantic integration. Georgia faces continued international pressure to improve the electoral process and public confidence in the quality and transparency of elections. The upcoming election cycle, from 2016 through 2018, will be an important test of integration efforts and will be under scrutiny by the international community.  Critical to these processes will be the presence of viable local organizations mounting credible, non-partisan monitoring efforts.  During the October 2013 Presidential election, the OSCE noted that, “Civil society and citizen observer organizations undertook a number of activities to support the electoral process and monitor the elections. The involvement of a large number of citizen observers and groups throughout the electoral process enhanced the transparency overall.”

Non-partisan election observation is a core part of the election process and of paramount importance in transitional democracies such as Georgia, including countering partisan efforts to monitor elections in Georgia.  For every election in the previous electoral cycle, there were 50 to 60 local NGOs registered to observe elections. Many of these organizations were affiliated with political parties and never published a statement or report on their election observations or implemented any activities in between elections to support reforms or improvements.  This approach reduces the credibility of domestic monitoring groups and increases the importance of supporting non-partisan groups that have the confidence of the general public and the international community.  The existence of non-partisan election monitoring can help level the playing field for smaller political forces and candidates by reducing the amount of money they need to spend on poll watchers.  In addition, larger parties feel that having one official representative at a polling station is not enough, and they have established NGOs for the sole purpose of observing elections.  If there are no neutral observers at the Precinct, District, and Central Election Commission levels, only party commission members, party observers and party-affiliated NGOs will be present in most places, creating an environment conducive for election fraud. 

In addition, neutral, local organizations are well suited to understanding the local context and constituency concerns which contribute to the credibility and transparency of electoral and political processes. Non-partisan observation extends to the monitoring of political parties, finances, media, campaigns, election officials and processes, and helps to balance political rhetoric and campaign jargon for the public and other specific stakeholders. 

C.	STRATEGIC FOCUS

The overall goal of this APS is to support credible electoral and political process monitoring activities that will inform the public and engage citizens in electoral and political processes in Georgia. This is integral to USAID Mission goals and will complement on-going and future projects to strengthen electoral and political processes in Georgia.
   
USAID Strategic Framework

This APS has been designed to advance: USAID’s 2013-2017 Country Development Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) for Georgia, the strategic goals of USAID’s activities under the Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes (SEPP) Project, and the Agency’s USAID Forward objectives.  In addition, it supports the Government of Georgia’s (GoG) reform initiatives intended to increase the transparency, accountability, effectiveness of electoral and political processes, including those directly related to the performance of the Election Commissions. For further information, please see the following documents supporting this APS.

•	SEPP Project Summary and Logframe 
•	2013-2017 USAID/Caucasus CDCS 
•	USAID Forward
•	Local Systems: A Framework for Supporting Sustained Development

In 2012, the USAID Mission in Georgia initiated a CDCS with the following overarching goal: Georgia’s democratic, free-market, Western-oriented transformation strengthened and sustained.  Of the three Development Objectives (DOs) under the CDCS, this APS will fall under DO 1: Democratic checks and balances and accountable governance enhanced.

According to the CDCS, if DO1 is achieved, an increased percentage of Georgians will more actively participate in the governance of their nation. Government will become responsive to Georgians’ aspirations, preferences, and needs through elections and political processes. Georgia’s political system will become more democratic with stronger links between state and society, and mechanisms for accommodation of citizens’ needs will be further institutionalized.  

This APS will directly contribute to DO 1’s Intermediate Results (IR): 

IR 1.2 	Political and electoral processes are more competitive, deliberative, and transparent

This IR recognizes that citizens who actively participate in their nation’s public affairs play a critically important role in a vibrant democracy.  An informed and engaged citizenry provides both a check on government power and valuable feedback the government can use to become more responsive. Local organizations monitoring elections and political processes are an important part of the feedback loop. 

Current USAID Activities 

Awards under this project will complement USAID’s SEPP Project which will work to deepen and institutionalize Georgia's democratic electoral and political processes.  

In 2014, USAID funded four awards under SEPP. 
•	Strengthening Political Process (SPP) is implemented through separate awards by the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI). NDI is building the capacity of political factions in the Georgian Parliament and sakrebulos in six municipalities, while IRI works to build the capacity of political parties in Tbilisi and the regions.
•	Strengthening Electoral Processes (SEP) is implemented by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) and works to improve the capacity of the CEC, improve electoral legislation, and increase civic education.
•	The International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) monitored the 2014 local elections and continues to monitor local government reform and hiring processes. 

All current awards under the SEPP project will last through 2019, except ISFED which will end in August 2015.  The APS awardees will complement activities of USAID partners through local election and political process monitoring. Specifically, activities related to political party monitoring will be conducted in close cooperation with IRI and NDI, while monitoring of the CEC or activities of other state agencies will be conducted in close cooperation with IFES.  In addition, if the USG deploys international observer teams for any of the upcoming elections, close cooperation with those international observers is also expected.

SEPP builds on previous gains promoted by USAID since the late 1990s. Assistance through the years has included work to develop political party structures, campaign techniques, communication efforts, political parties in Parliament, institution building of electoral bodies, voter education, and building and deploying the capacity of Georgian NGOs to influence and oversee political and electoral processes.  All of these activities featured important elements of citizen outreach in order to engage ever broader circles of society into the country’s political life.  According to a 2012 evaluation of USAID’s previous Political Party Strengthening in Georgia program (PPSG) and the Parliamentary Strengthening Project (PSP), the evaluation team concluded that the work of IRI and NDI, “...did strengthen party, youth wing, and individual capacity in identifiable ways… regional party-building activities did help parties expand their party structure into regions, engage in more public activities, and train party activists.” According to the IFES October 2014 Electoral Integrity Assessment Report, Georgia’s election processes, “have been characterized by improved election management, significant progress in the accuracy and credibility of the voter registration process, increasingly effective civil society participation and peaceful political competition.”

D.	OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

Participatory democratic governance requires government transparency, citizen engagement, and mechanisms for accountability that are supported by public access to information. Electoral and political processes are at the nexus of citizen engagement in the democratic process. This nexus requires cooperation by various institutional actors with citizen oversight to provide transparency, accountability and sustain public confidence.  

Objective: Increase the confidence of Georgian citizens in local and national elections by contributing to increased transparency and accountability of electoral and political processes.

USAID intends to issue multiple awards under this APS to applicants who address the above objective. Awards under this APS will strengthen election and political processes by increasing competent oversight by credible local organizations. 

Anticipated Results:
•	Local observer groups mount credible, non-partisan electoral and/or political process monitoring missions.
•	Monitoring data is available to the public in a timely manner.
•	Recommendations to improve electoral and/or political processes are developed and published and/or presented to relevant stakeholders. 

Applicants may apply to cover one or multiple areas listed below, with full or partial geographic coverage based on justified strategic priorities, and can propose any additional related areas of focus. USAID will require relevant justification for selecting a specific scope and impact of the proposed activity.

Illustrative Activities:

I.	Election Observation

In order to maximize USAID resources, applicants applying to observe elections should plan to cover the entire election cycle, including 2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential elections.  Given the long time period up to the 2018 election cycle and the uncertainty of the political and electoral environment at that time, interventions around the 2018 presidential elections should be proposed in general terms.  USAID intends to make all awards to local organizations for the upcoming election cycle prior to the 2016 Parliamentary elections; local organizations should not expect that additional election and political process monitoring awards will be made between 2016 and 2018 by USAID.

Short-term observation on election day is important to gather detailed information on polling stations to contribute to analysis and conclusions of the voting and tabulating process. Monitoring the pre-election period is also important in order to judge whether an equal playing field was ensured for all stakeholders.  Organizations applying to monitor elections must provide a clear methodology for short-term and/or long-term observation and clearly indicate how results will be shared with the broader public.

II.	Observe Other Electoral and Political Processes 

Selected electoral processes can become the focus of a single monitoring project.  While it is not required to cover each and every district, political party or media outlet, USAID will require relevant justification for selecting a specific scope and impact on the overall electoral process. 

Examples include but are not limited to: 
•	Monitor media coverage of each candidate and party activities for equal access and compliance with the law; 
•	Monitor how well members of marginalized and/or minority groups are informed of political platforms and electoral rights and responsibilities of the voter and their participation; 
•	Monitor the activities, composition and preparedness of Election Management Bodies, the Inter Agency Task Force or other relevant state agencies directly involved in electoral processes; 
•	Monitor the complaints adjudication process and consistency of decisions by all relevant bodies including courts;
•	Monitor the use of administrative resources during an election period; and
•	Monitor the quality of the voters list through conducting an audit, and monitor policy implementation of relevant state agencies related to voter registration.

Monitor the activities of political parties and their adherence to ethical standards and rules of conduct during an election period.  

Examples include but are not limited to: 
•	Account for campaign expenditures and compliance with reporting requirements by candidates and parties;
•	Monitor party campaign events and voter education initiatives with specific focus on minority areas; 
•	Monitor the rate of fulfillment of candidate and political party promises during the campaign period and the first year of office, providing analysis of successes and barriers to fulfillment;
•	Monitor political parties programs, policies and platforms, including to compare them and/or analyze their commitment to gender equality, Euro-Atlantic integration and/or other policy priorities;
•	Monitor the ability of all political parties and electoral stakeholders to  organize discussions, meetings, and freely and publicly debates around the issues;
•	Monitor adherence to ethical standards by political parties, including hate speech used by political parties or candidates;
•	Monitor the consistency of decisions made by members of the Central Election Commission appointed by political parties; and
•	Monitor political parties’ effort to increase the participation of youth, people with disabilities, minority populations and women during the campaign period.

SECTION II – ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

The USAID Mission in Georgia invites eligible and qualified organizations to submit concept papers and, eventually, if requested by USAID, full applications in response to this APS.  Eligible Georgian organizations (such as NGOs, advocacy groups, for-profit businesses, trade and professional organizations, media outlets, independent national institutions, research and public policy institutes, think tanks, and universities) must:
o	Be organized under the laws of Georgia;
o	Be registered in the Georgian NGO registry for at least two years if registration is applicable to Applicant organization;
o	Have their primary place of business in Georgia;
o	Be majority owned by individuals who are citizens or lawful permanent residents of Georgia or be managed by a governing body, the majority of whom are citizens or lawful permanent residents Georgia; 
o	Not be controlled by foreign entity or by an individual or individuals who are not citizens or permanent residents of Georgia;
o	Have an annual budget of not less than $50,000 per year in any two years since 2012; and
o	Have at least two years of experience working in a related field. 

Evidence that these criteria are met will be required to be submitted along with the full application for those organizations that are invited to that phase of the competition and will be part of the evaluation criteria.

The term “controlled by” means a majority ownership or beneficiary interest as defined above, or the power, either directly or indirectly, whether exercised or exercisable, to control the election, appointment, or tenure of the organization’s managers or a majority of the organization’s governing body by any means, e.g., ownership, contract, or operation of law.
 
“Foreign entity” means an organization that fails to meet any part of the “local organization” definition.  Government controlled and government owned organizations in which the recipient government owns a majority interest or in which the majority of a governing body are government employees, are included in the above definition of government owned organization.

Partnerships of eligible Georgian organizations are allowed.  If applications come from a coalition of NGOs, the prime organization (recipient of USAID award) must comply with all above mentioned requirements and all other organizations must comply with first three requirements. 

If applicable, lead applicants are encouraged to include institutional capacity building plans for partner organizations.

B. ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS

Subject to the conditions for eligibility provided in Section II.A of this APS, if the applicant is selected to submit a full application, the applicant will submit official documentation of its organization’s formal legal status, as follows:

a.	State registration certificate 
b.	By-laws
c.	Composition of Governing Body (indicating the citizenship of members and other occupation)
d.	Organization’s budget demonstrating they meet funding requirement. 
e.	List of activities implemented by the organization in recent years related to the proposed activities.
f.	Other supporting documentation to demonstrate relevant experience in the field and technical capacity to implement the project

SECTION III – APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A.	APPLICATION PROCESS

At this time, the application process involves two stages: an information session and the submission of a concept paper. After these two stages, USAID will invite the selected Concept Papers to submit a full application. 

Stage 1. Information session: The Mission will hold an information session in Tbilisi on May 20, 2015 to respond to questions of clarification from prospective applicants. Applicants interested in attending the information session should submit: (a) their questions on any APS-related issues, and (b) the names of their representatives attending (maximum 2 persons). This information should be sent to Eka Gamezardashvili at egamezardashvili@usaid.gov by May 15, 2015. 

Answers to all questions, posed both in advance and during the information session, will be posted on: http://www.grants.gov/, www.jobs.ge and the Mission’s public website.  In addition, print-outs of the APS, supporting documents, questions/answers from the information sessions and additional information will be posted at USAID’s Centers for Civic Engagement in Marneuli, Rustavi, Sagarejo, Telavi, Gori, Akhaltsikhe, Kutaisi, Ozurgeti, Zugdidi, and Batumi.

Stage 2.  Submission and review of concept papers:  Applicants must submit concept papers of no more than 8 pages (see detailed instructions below) electronically via e-mail to Regional Contracting Office, USAID Mission in Georgia at: rcocaucasus@usaid.gov with a cc to Eka Gamezardashvili, Acquisition Agent at egamezardashvili@usaid.gov no later than June 8, 2015. Late applications will not be considered for review. The Mission will notify unsuccessful applicants that their concept papers have not been selected and successful applicants to submit a full proposal.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Stage 3 and 4 are ONLY relevant if your Concept Paper has been selected. Please do not submit a full application unless requested by USAID.

Stage 3. Submission of full applications: Notified applicants will prepare and submit full applications by the date indicated by the Mission.  Please note that the invitation to submit a full application does not constitute an award; USAID may choose not to fund full applications even after they have been requested.

Stage 4.  Review and selection of full applications: USAID will review applications and notify both unsuccessful applicants and applicants under consideration for award within 60 days of the closing date for full applications. Applicants under consideration will be required to submit Standard Form (SF) 424 and signed certifications, along with documents that support the organization’s eligibility to apply. Applicants under consideration will be advised if budget-related discussions are to be initiated, or if additional information (technical or budget-related) is required. Applicants under consideration for an award that have never received funding from USAID will be subject to a pre-award review of their financial systems. Award(s) will be made to responsible applicant(s) whose application(s) best meets the requirements of this APS and the evaluation criteria contained herein.  Issuance of this APS does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. Government (USG), nor does it commit the USG to pay for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of an application. The Mission will notify unsuccessful applicants that their full applications have not been selected.

B.	CONCEPT PAPER INSTRUCTIONS

All concept papers must contain the items below and must comply with the listed page restrictions for each section and be submitted by the deadline of June 8, 2015. This is the first step of the application process. Selected concept papers will then be invited for a full application.  Concept papers must be:

•	Typed, single space, normal margin, on A4 size paper;
•	Printed in 12 font size; charts, tables and spreadsheets may be not less than 10 point font;
•	Written in English;
•	If submitted electronically, written in Word (version 2000 or later) or Adobe PDF format with spreadsheets in MS Excel (version 2000 or later) or in tables that are compatible with MS Word.
•	Including the Self-Assessment checklist noted in B.5 below.

1. Cover page (use template provided)
•	Concise title of project,
•	Solicitation Number of this APS,
•	Name and address of the (lead) organization,
•	Type of organization (such as for-profit, non-profit, university, network, etc.),
•	Contact point (lead contact name, relevant telephone, and e-mail information),
•	Names of other organizations that have received (or will receive) the application or are funding some of the proposed activity, 
•	Confirmation of format and page limitations by checking each box;
•	Signature of authorized representative of the applicant. 

2. Problem statement (1 page)
A brief description of the challenge as it relates to the sphere of electoral and political process monitoring, its causes, and impacts on society, indicating data that informed the applicant’s overall concept and approach (e.g. secondary data, findings from the evaluation of a development project, or the applicant’s own analysis/assessment). 

3.  Technical Approach including project goal, intended results and key activities (2 pages)
•	An overall goal, anticipated results and key activities to achieve those results; 
•	The applicant’s hypothesis of desired change, its approach to tackling the identified problem, and an explanation of why the applicant considers the proposed approach innovative and/or effective;
•	An account of the target population, the scope of the project, timeline and the geographical focus, including a justification for such selection (information about 2018 elections can be presented very generally at the concept note stage); 
•	Information on the methodology to be used during monitoring;
•	Information how the applicant's proposal takes into account gender concerns as well as the interests of persons with disability, minorities and marginalized groups;
•	Information on relevant activities of other donors, international organizations, and stakeholders as applicable. 

4.  Plan for performance management and outreach (1 page)
•	A summary plan for rigorous monitoring and evaluation including the main outcome and impacts of the proposed activities and a results framework; 

5. Institutional past experience and capacity (1 page and self-assessment checklist provided)
•	A brief description of applicant’s, as well as any prospective partners’, past work and relevant experience in the past three years; 
•	A brief reference to the applicant’s strengths, distinctive competence, and/or comparative advantage that will make it well-suited to addressing the challenge;
•	Completed self-assessment checklist on institutional capacity.

6. Summary Budget (up to 3 pages as budget is separated out by election)
•	Proposed budget, including annual breakdowns and disaggregated by direct and indirect program costs. Direct costs may include but are not limited to the costs of salaries, workshops, travel communications, report preparation, environmental analysis, passport issuance, visas, medical exam and inoculations, insurance (other than insurance included in the applicant’s fringe benefits), equipment, office rent, etc. Indirect costs may include those that are incurred by an organization but that cannot be attributed directly to a specific project;
•	Proposed amount of the applicant’s financial as well as in-kind participation, clearly identifying which resources are cash and which are in-kind and providing information on the nature and valuation of the in-kind contributions;
•	Cost-share. If applicable, a proposed amount of leverage from prospective partners, both cash as well as in-kind. Applicants are not required to include cost-sharing (matching) funds;  
•	The budget for proposed activities must be broken out by each election—2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential--in order to assess the cost of individual elections and the entire election cycle.  

C.	FULL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS 

Important note: Please, do not submit a full application unless requested to do so by USAID.

Full applications must be:

•	Typed, single space on letter size, not legal size, paper;
•	Printed in 12 font size; charts, tables and spreadsheets may be not less than10 font;
•	Written in English; 
•	If submitted electronically, written in Word (version 2000 or later) or Adobe PDF format with spreadsheets in MS Excel (version 2000 or later) or in tables that are compatible with MS Word.

Full application must contain the following information. Excluding the cover page, the table of contents, past performance, the budget and annexes, full applications must not exceed 17 pages.

1.  Cover page (use same cover page as for the concept paper)

2.  Table of contents

3.  Executive Summary (up to 2 pages)

4.  Body of application (up to 15 pages), including:

4.1.  Problem statement and analysis:  A description of the development challenge; analysis of its causes and impacts on men, women and other marginalized populations; as well as  opportunities for addressing identified issues effectively. The applicant must explain what data was used to inform the above analysis and the applicant’s overall concept (e.g. secondary data, findings from the evaluation of a development project, or the applicant’s own assessment/analysis). 

4.2.  Hypothesis of change and the applicant’s overall approach:  A description of the hypothesis of change that determined the programmatic approach to address the identified problem effectively.  Simply put, a program hypothesis outlines the if-then statement underlying the proposed intervention.  In general, a theory of change states what expected (changed) result will follow from a particular set of actions.  A simple example would be, “If I add more fuel to the fire, then it will burn hotter.”  

In this section, applicants must also offer its assessment of potential risks related to planned activities and ways to mitigate them. Applicants must also explain how the proposed action differs from, contributes to, and/or adds value to other stakeholders’ programs in this field of activity.

4.3.  Goal and objectives, activities and results, geographical focus and duration of the project: Applications must clearly explain connections between expected results, activities, and the goal of the project.  Applicants must demonstrate an implementation approach based on logically sequenced activities and that is directly correlated to the hypothesis of change.  Applicants must describe an intended impact on the target population of the project, as well as its geographical focus.  They must indicate how it contributes to advancing the USAID/Caucasus in Georgia’s Mission’s Development Objectives.  If applicable, applicants should indicate how they plan to cooperate with relevant USAID-supported projects. 

4.4.  Sustainability analysis and an environmental review:
Sustainability analysis:  Applicants are required to identify and analyze the sustainability of the proposed technical approaches. Applicants should explain how they plan to promote sustainable outcomes going beyond the end of the project timeframe.  This involves analyzing the institutional capacity of the Applicant that will need to be in place or developed through the project, including systems, policies, and skills.

Environmental Review:  Applicants must assess any potential environmental risks emanating from the proposed activities.  Applicants must propose a plan that ensures that negative environmental impacts are analyzed, reduced, and monitored from design through implementation.

4.5.  A performance management plan (PMP):  A detailed PMP with clear objectives and sub-objectives, a mixture of outcome and output indicators, data sources, and data gathering methods, as well as estimated baseline data and indicator targets. Applicants must also explain how the indicator data and lessons learned in the course of implementation will be managed to contribute to achieving the intended development impact. Monitoring and evaluation methods must be specific, measurable, realistic and applicable to the goals and objectives.  Plans must also include gender-sensitive indicators and sex-disaggregated data as appropriate. The PMP must also include a logical framework (log frame) which clearly communicates the development hypothesis and an indicator table showing what data will be collected. USAID will provide a template that can be used for the indicator table or as a reference to develop one. 

4.6.  Implementation Schedule:  A chart indicating when activities will take place over the course of the proposed project.

4.7  Institutional Capacity: This section must include a description of the composition and organizational structure of the proposed project team, indicating key staff and including team member titles, roles and requisite technical expertise.  Applicants should provide sufficient information on the technical and managerial experience of the project staff and/or Position Descriptions for key staff.  Applicants must provide experienced, qualified personnel in relevant disciplines and areas for project management and professional staff positions.  Applicants must indicate their strengths, distinctive competence, and/or comparative advantage that make them well-suited to addressing the identified challenge. This section must also include roles, responsibilities, and contributions of the prospective partner organization(s), if applicable.

5. Past Performance (up to 3 pages): Applicants should include a list of past performance references. Applicants are requested to list all contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements involving relevant (similar or related) programs conducted by the applicant (or consortium) over the past three years. Reference information shall include the location, current telephone numbers, points of contact, overall dollar value of the program, and award numbers if available. A brief description of work performed by the applicant is also required. Newer organizations, or Applicants with no related prior grant awards, remain eligible for consideration and are encouraged to apply. If the applicant has conducted election-related monitoring in the past, include any public statements made by the organization as an ANNEX.

6. Budget:  
•	Budget Information (a summary of the budget must be submitted using Standard Forms 424, 424A and 424B which are available at Grants.gov under “Forms” tab).
•	Detailed budget and financial plan with major line items, identification of funding source (if applicable, partners) for each, and a narrative description of what the resources will be used for;
•	The budget for proposed activities must be broken out by each election—2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential--in order to assess the cost of individual elections and the entire election cycle;
•	Cost-share (if applicable): A proposed amount of leverage from prospective partners, both cash as well as in-kind. Applicants are not required to submit cost-share in their budget.

Annexes:  
•	Letter of intent from each partner organization (if applicable); 
•	Curricula vitae of key staff; and  
•	Branding & Marking Plan.
•	Eligibility Documents per Section II.B: state registration certificate; organization’s By-Laws; composition of governing body (indicating citizenship of members); organization’s budget from relevant years, including funding sources; list of activities implemented by the organization in recent years related to the proposed activities.
•	Any public statements made by the organization on election-related monitoring.

All applications must be in English and submitted electronically via email. 

SECTION IV – APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

A.	EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT PAPERS 
**As noted below, the self-assessment checklist must be included.  If it is not, USAID will not review the concept paper
USAID’s review of concept papers will determine whether the proposed activities meet the basic criteria below. USAID will evaluate all concept papers and use a rating of acceptable or not acceptable with regards to the criteria below. 

Relevance and soundness of the problem statement:  USAID will assess the extent to which the applicant’s problem analysis is rigorous, credible, and realistic.  

Effectiveness of the applicant’s technical approach:  USAID will assess the extent to which the application (a) advances the objectives and priorities of this APS (including the expected results) through the creation of the identified goal and anticipated results; (b) offers a credible hypothesis of change to address the identified problem effectively; (c) sound methodology for effectiveness of implementation including the justification for and approaches on gender issues, inclusion of persons with disabilities and minorities, and the selection of a geographical focus, where applicable; (d) how efforts will be complimentary with existing activities.  

Performance Management:  USAID will assess whether the performance management plan includes attainable outcomes and impacts of the proposed activity identified in a results framework.

Commensurate past experience and institutional capacity to implement proposed activities successfully:  USAID will assess the extent to which the applicant’s past experience and institutional capacity paves the way for a successful implementation of the stated objectives. Additionally, the Applicant must complete the self-assessment checklist and include it in the submission. 

Budget: USAID will assess the extent to which the budget reflects reasonable costs, includes all major line items, and aligns with the proposed technical approach.

USAID will notify unsuccessful applicants and will invite successful applicants to submit a full application by August 2015 (estimate).  

B. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR FULL APPLICATIONS

The Technical Application will be evaluated in accordance with the following Evaluation Criteria:

Self Assessment Checklist				GO/NO GO (pass/fail)
Technical Approach	 		       		40 points 
Management Plan					35 points
Past Performance					25 points 
100 points

Technical Approach (40 points, see Section III.C.4.1-4.4 above)
•	The problem analysis is sound, rigorous, evidence-based and applicable to the areas outlined in the APS.
•	A clear hypothesis of change that identified the problem and solution. A concise outline of risks and how to mitigate them. Demonstrated knowledge of other stakeholders’ programs in this field of activity and how proposed efforts will not duplicate other stakeholders’ efforts.  
•	The technical approach and connections between the goal of the project and expected results and activities are clearly explained. The intended effect on the target population and geographical area is clearly defined and contributes to USAID/Caucasus in Georgia’s Development Objective 1.
•	If applicable, a sound assessment of how negative environmental impacts will be reduced and monitored for the duration of the entire activity.
•	The design of the application is informed by gender, disabled and minority considerations.

Management Plan (35 points, see Section III.C.4.5-7 above)
•	The application has a well-designed plan for performance management, monitoring and evaluation, and learning. 
•	The implementation schedule is realistic in terms of achieving the expected results of this APS. 
•	Commensurate institutional capacity to achieve the objectives of the application, including qualified and experienced key personnel; and a clear description of the organizational structure of the project team with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. 

Past Performance (25 points, see Section III.C.5 above)
•	Commensurate past performance to achieve the objectives of the application.
•	Demonstrate (with supporting documents if needed) technical capacity to implement the grant project.

C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS

Budget Negotiations 

The Applicant’s budget will not be assigned points but will be evaluated on the extent to which it reflects reasonable costs, includes all major line items, are allowable expenses, sufficiently detailed, and aligns with the proposed technical approach. Applications that maximize direct activity costs including cost sharing and that minimize administrative costs are encouraged. 

While there is no page limit for the cost application, applicants are encouraged to be as concise as possible.

Applicants will be required to submit SF 424, and signed certifications. 

Following an application review by the technical committee, applicants will be advised if budget-related discussions are to be initiated, additional information is required, or if a decision has been reached not to fund the application. 

Type of Award(s) / Substantial Involvement 

The number of awards under this APS is subject to the availability of funds.  USAID may make a single award, multiple awards, or no awards at all under this APS, and reserves the right to close this program at any point up to the closing date.  Awards are one-time only and are generally not renewable.  USAID reserves the right, in consultation with applicants, to reduce, revise or increase budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements and substantial involvement by the Mission as applicable. 

While many types of organizations are eligible (see below for eligibility criteria for partners), it is USAID policy not to award profit under grants and cooperative agreements.  Consequently, no fee or profit will be paid to the grant or cooperative agreement recipient.  Foregone profits do not count toward partner contributions. However, all reasonable, allocable, and allowable expenses, both direct and indirect, which are related to the grant program and are in accordance with applicable cost standards, may be covered by the grant. 

This program is authorized in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended.  Awards shall be made in accordance with ADS-303.  For Non U.S. Governmental Organizations, the ADS -303 Standard Provisions for Non-U.S., Non-Governmental Recipients will apply.  

Applicants can find copies of these documents by referring to the USAID Homepage at the following links: 

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/cfr.html#22; and 
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/omb.html;

Following favorable negotiations with the Mission, USAID may award a grant, cooperative agreement, or a collaboration agreement to the institution proposing the partnership or to a third entity that was proposed to implement a jointly funded partnership. 

Depending on the evaluations and award determinations from Final Applications, USAID may decide to be “substantially involved” in the implementation of the program, and therefore award a cooperative agreement(s), a specific type of grant. Cooperative agreements are identical to grants except that USAID may be substantially involved in one or more of the following areas: 

1. USAID approval of the recipient’s implementation plans (limited to not more frequently than annually); 
2. USAID approval of specified key personnel (limited to 5 positions or 5 percent of the recipient’s total team size, whichever is greater); 
3. USAID approval of exact scale and scope of observation as applicable
4. USAID approval of any publication issued under this award
4. USAID and recipient collaboration or joint participation, which includes one or more of the following: 
a. Collaborative involvement of selection of advisory committee members (USAID may also choose to become a member), if applicable; 
b. USAID concurrence on the selection of sub-award recipients and/or the substantive technical/programmatic provisions of sub-awards; 
c. USAID approval of a program monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan (to the extent that such information is not included in the application); 
d. USAID monitoring to permit direction and redirection because of interrelationships with other projects; and 
e. USAID authority to immediately halt a construction activity, if applicable. 

For more details refer to USAID ADS 303.3.11 at http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/303.pdf. 

Reporting 

Successful applicants will be required to report on program activities on a quarterly basis and in addition will require reports on a deliverable basis subject to monitoring activities. Applicants in consortia or in partnerships with other organizations will need to identify roles for reporting on activities. This may be determined in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which will outline responsibilities for quarterly reporting, performance monitoring plan (collection of data), and other relevant reporting requirements.

Marking and Branding

Effective January 2, 2006, all USAID-sponsored assistance awards are required to adhere to branding policies and revised marking requirements for grants and cooperative agreements in accordance with ADS 320.  This includes visibly displaying the USAID Standard Graphic Identity that clearly communicates assistance is, ―From the American people‖ on all programs, projects, activities, publications, public communications, and commodities provided or supported through USAID assistance awards.  ADS 320 requires that, after the evaluation of the applications, the USAID Agreement Officer will request the Apparently Successful Applicant to submit a Branding Strategy and Marking Plan that describes how the program, project, or activity is named and positioned, how it is promoted and communicated to beneficiaries and cooperating country citizens, and identifies all donors and explains how they will be acknowledged. The Branding Strategy will be negotiated and finalized as part of assistance award. ADS 320 may be found at the following website: http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/320.pdf 

Specific communications and promotion measures shall be described in the “Branding Strategy” and “Branding Implementation Plan” and specific marking will be described in the “Marking Plan” for this award(s). 

Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) 

An Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) describing the successful activity's purpose, location, duration and intensity, and considers alternatives and assesses impacts, including cumulative impacts, in light of existing and known proposed activities will be pre-pared as a part of review and approval process in accordance with USAID Environmental Procedures. The Environmental Compliance requirements will be developed and incorporated into the award based on the IEE. 

Prohibition against Discrimination (October 2011) 

No U.S. citizen or legal resident shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, nation-al origin, age, disability, or sex under any program or activity funded by this award when work under the grant is performed in the U.S. or when employees are recruited from the U.S. 

Additionally, USAID is committed to achieving and maintaining a diverse and representative workforce and a workplace free of discrimination. Based on law, Executive Order, and Agency policy, USAID prohibits discrimination, including harassment, in its own workplace on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, disability, age, veteran’s status, sexual orientation, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, and any other conduct that does not adversely affect the performance of the employee. Recipients must comply with the requirements of the first paragraph of this provision and in addition, the Agency strongly encourages its recipients and their sub-recipients and vendors (at all tiers), performing both in the U.S. and overseas, to develop and enforce comprehensive nondiscrimination policies for their workplaces that include protection for all their employees on these expanded bases.