Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships

Feed the Future

Market Systems and Partnerships

GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT MANUAL

January 2021

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships: Grants Under Contract Manual B

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships (MSP)

GRANTS UNDER CONTRACT MANUAL

Activity Title: Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships Sponsoring USAID Office: Bureau for Resilience and Food Security Award Number: 7200AA20C00054 Awardee: DAI Global, LLC. Date of Submission: October 16, 2020, resubmitted January 6, 2021 USAID Contact: Kristin O’Planick, Contracting Officer’s Representative

[email protected] Activity Contact: Bronwyn Irwin, Chief of Party [email protected]

This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development under Contract

No. 7200AA20C00054. It was prepared by DAI for the Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships Activity. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the

United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships: Grants Under Contract Manual i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................I

ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................II

A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

1. FORMAT OF THE GUC MANUAL ......................................................................................................... 1 2. MSP GRANTS FUND ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. REMOTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................... 3

B. GOVERNING POLICY ON MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF

GRANTS.................................................................................................................. 4

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE........................................................................................................................... 4 2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES............................................................................................................... 5 3. POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 7 4. PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................14 5. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................15 6. RISK ASSESSMENT ...............................................................................................................................19 7. GRANT AWARD MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................22 8. WRAPPING UP THE GRANT ...............................................................................................................24

C. PROCEDURE 1: SOLICITATION AND AWARD OF GRANTS........................... 26

D. PROCEDURE 2: GRANT ADMINISTRATION, MANAGEMENT, AND

REPORTING .......................................................................................................... 35

E. PROCEDURE 3: CLOSING OUT GRANTS ....................................................... 40

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships: Grants Under Contract Manual ii

ACRONYMS ADS Automated Directives System APS Annual Program Statement AIDAR Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulations BAA Broad Agency Announcement CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO Contracting Officer COR Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) COP Chief of Party DAI DAI Global, LLC DCOP Deputy Chief of Party DUNS Data universal numbering system EO Executive Order FAR Federal Acquisition Regulations FOM Field Operations Manual FTF Feed the Future GEC Grant Evaluation Committee GUC Grants under Contract HCA Head of the Contracting Activity IEE Initial Environmental Examination IP Implementing Partner IR Intermediate Result JRE Justification to Restrict Eligibility LGU Local Government Unit MSD Market System Development MBIO Missions, Bureaus, Independent Offices MSME Micro, Small, Medium Enterprise MSP Market Systems & Partnerships MST Management Systems Team NDA Non-Disclosure Agreement NGO Non-Governmental Organization NOFO Notices of Funding Opportunities OFAC Office of Foreign Assets Control OMB Office of Management and Budget PIO Public International Organizations PSE Private Sector Engagement PSOA Project Schedule of Authorities PVO Private Volunteer Organization RAVG Remote Activity Verification Guidance RFA Request for Application REO Regional Environmental Officer SAM System for Award Management SGP Small Grant Program SO Strategic Objective TAMIS Technical and Administrative Management Information System TIP Trafficking in Persons USAID United States Agency for International Development USD United States Dollar USG United States Government FAA Fixed Amount Award

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships: Grants Under Contract Manual 1

A. INTRODUCTION

Purpose of Market Systems & Partnerships Grants Under Contract Manual This Grants Under Contract (GUC) Manual of the Feed the Future Market Systems & Partnerships (MSP) Activity comprises the policy and procedures governing DAI’s administration of a $30 million grants fund authorized under Contract No. 720AA20C00054. The policies and procedures described herein are adapted from DAI’s standard policies to the specific requirements of the MSP contract and the programmatic objectives of the Activity and are in full compliance with all required rules and regulations, including ADS 303 and ADS 302. This manual defines grant eligibility criteria and describes the procedures that will be used to manage grants throughout the grant cycle, including solicitation and evaluation of applications, disbursements, monitoring of results, and closeout requirements.

MSP GUC Manual Access and Format All DAI projects use the Technical Administrative Management Information System (TAMIS), housed in the Lotus Notes database, for implementing a GUC mechanism. The TAMIS database includes project policies, procedures, work instructions, forms, and templates for grants administration and award. The TAMIS database is customizable to meet specific project needs and demands and is updated alongside new or revised rules and regulations pertaining to ADS 302 or 303, or as informed by DAI best practices. Being that MSP is a US-based, centrally managed Activity, MSP’s operations and organizational policies will be governed by the U.S. Business Manual, which is housed in the DAI SharePoint. The U.S. Business Manual delineates corporate policies pertaining to contract compliance, equipment administration, project financial management, procurement, inventory management, travel and events logistics, human resources, and technical execution for conducting business with the United States Government. The GUC Manual will therefore be supported by the DAI U.S. Business Manual and be made publicly available in the TAMIS database. The DAI MSP team will have the flexibility to customize field implementation policies to suit MSP implementation needs. All customized policies for the MSP Activity will be located with full public access in the TAMIS database, allowing staff to immediately access the most up-to-date version of any customized policy, procedure or template, including for grants. TAMIS tracks version histories of each document and captures timestamped, digital approval at the project or corporate level to allow a modification of policy, procedure, work instruction, form, or template. The TAMIS system provides robust internal controls for project implementation and permits systems tracking in case of an audit or for historical knowledge capture. In Summary:

• The DAI U.S. Business Manual governs all Activity operations and policies.

• TAMIS will publicly house the approved MSP Grants Under Contract Manual and any and all customized policies or procedures pertaining to the implementation of the MSP Activity.

• TAMIS will be used to administer all grant awards, implementation, and closeout.

1. FORMAT OF THE GUC MANUAL

The format of the MSP GUC manual is organized consistent with Section 12 of the DAI Field Operations Manual (FOM). This GUC Manual consists of an overall MSP grants policy and three procedures, all of which are derived from the FOM. Throughout this manual, references will be


made to specific policies, procedures, or work instructions from the following sections of the FOM. They include:

• Policy 12: Governing Policy on Management and Implementation of Grants (herein Section B)

• Procedure 12.1: Solicitation and Award of Grants (herein Procedure 1)

• Procedure 12.2: Grantee Management and Reporting (herein Procedure 2)

• Procedure 12.3: Closing Out Grants (herein Procedure 3)

By presenting the MSP GUC Manual in a manner consistent with DAI’s FOM policies and procedures, rather than as a stand-alone document, MSP will: a) remain consistent with USAID rules and regulations and DAI corporate policies for grants administration; ii) achieve the technical objectives of the MSP contract for authorized use of the GUC mechanism; and iii) and ensure documented controls through a robust system of regulatory compliance, cost reasonableness, and technical quality reviews. MSP will ensure that any modifications to the GUC Manual are maximally accessible to MSP staff, that all changes are tracked and approved per DAI’s governing policies on project implementation, and that this document can be adapted as necessary to the project’s evolving needs.

2. MSP GRANTS FUND

MSP will support USAID to advance learning and good practice on market systems development (MSD) and private sector engagement (PSE) within USAID (Washington and Missions), USAID partners, and beyond by providing and improving upon the evidence, capacity, tools, technical assistance, and/or services required to design, implement, monitor, and/or evaluate activities that lead to inclusive and resilient agriculture-led economic growth, improved food security and nutrition, and increased incomes for the poor. The MSP Activity will work with USAID/Washington, Missions, Bureaus, and Independent Offices through Mission buy-ins. The MSP contract will fulfill four objectives.

• Objective 1 – To support effective private sector partnership development and management.

• Objective 2 – To provide analytical and other services in support of design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of market systems and private sector engagement activities.

• Objective 3 – To generate knowledge on both market systems development and private sector engagement

• Objective 4 – To build capacity to design, implement, monitor, evaluate, and learn from market systems and private sector engagement activities.

The grants under contract mechanism will primarily be used to support Objective 1 through the development and management of effective private sector partnerships by facilitating the co-creation of transformative shared-value partnerships with U.S., multinational, and local firms and investors, civil society organizations, and host-country governments; piloting new blended finance mechanisms, such as providing catalytic capital to attract private investment for commercializing agricultural technologies; and, providing technical assistance to refine business models to reach base-of-the-pyramid markets1. The other three objectives, although not prioritized under the GUC mechanism, can be supported with grants. The types of potential grant activities, complemented by technical assistance, will be further defined within buy-in scopes of work.

1 An economic term referring to the largest but the poorest socio-economic group constituting more than 2.5 billion people that live on less than $2.50 a day.


3. REMOTE MANAGEMENT

The nature of any centrally managed buy-in mechanism requires effective remote management. The effects of the global pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, have increased the importance of sound remote management practices and controls, Until the risks from COVID-19 are reduced, limitations on international travel and local mobilization will continue to influence the conduct of business, creating a prolonged reliance on virtual meetings and digital technology. To ensure MSP meets and overcomes this challenge with operational rigor—including proper data security and integrity—MSP will consider the following remote management approaches to grant development.

➢ The safety and security of MSP staff, USAID, and MSP partners will come first. MSP will follow host-country laws, guidance from leading public health experts and scientists, organizational policies surrounding mitigation measures for COVID-19, and DAI and USAID security protocols.

➢ When releasing a new NOFO, MSP will include a section specifically asking grantees about their continuity plans, including: how will they implement activities and/or reach milestones given the current mobility restrictions in the country? Grantees will be asked to provide examples of adaptive management to demonstrate organizational capacity.

➢ When co-designing grants with applications, MSP will include a section on adaptive management to capture expected challenges in implementation plans and budgets.

➢ Although challenges may arise in carrying out in-person site visits or other due diligence

processes, DAI will continue to meet its standards of pre-award due diligence excellence by holding virtual “office visits,” receiving materials electronically, verifying the source of documents with local issuing agencies, and using virtual calls instead of email for references. When possible, MSP will use local consultants to conduct drop-in site visits or schedule visits using creative technologies such as video filmed with a cell phone.

➢ Grantees will be provided educational materials with respect to DAI best-practices for

COVID-19 safety mitigation, so long as this material does not conflict with local government authority recommendations or laws. Material will share the most up-to-date information from the Center for Disease Control or the World Health Organization for proper social distancing, public health safety and hygiene. This guidance will be built into program activity design for safe and effective activity implementation.

➢ Grant modification requests are likely to be more common, including milestone revisions

(i.e., due date and scope), cost extensions, or even expansion of grant activities. DAI will consider developing smaller milestones that are achievable in smaller results/quantities during this time. Engagement Managers will work closely with grantees to manage performance timelines, such as more frequent informal check-ins via phone or digital platforms and will be engaged with beneficiaries of the grantee to survey and verify grantee performance.


B. GOVERNING POLICY ON

MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

OF GRANTS

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE

1.1 Pursuant to Section B.5 of Contract No. 720AA20C00054, DAI developed this GUC Manual to provide a comprehensive statement of DAI’s contractual, financial, and administrative management policies for implementing a GUC program for MSP. USAID has authorized up to $30 million for the GUC mechanism to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including both non-profit and for-profit entities for the entirety of the period of performance (June 2020 – June 2025).

1.2 MSP is a flexible buy-in mechanism that allows USAID Missions, Bureaus, and Independent Offices (MBIOs) to efficiently access the expertise required to develop new private sector engagements; support MBIOs in the design, implementation, and evaluation of PSE and MSD activities; and strengthen learning and capacity in these two critical approaches. MSP bolsters the ability of MBIOs to attract and leverage private resources and adopt facilitative approaches to address critical development challenges more sustainably and at greater scale. Due to the centrally managed nature of the project, DAI will work with US-based or local partners across a multitude of different countries, with varying capacity, and more often than not, managed remotely through MSP’s activity engagement teams, comprising mainly of the Engagement Manager and the Grants and Subcontracts Manager. The DAI team will work collaboratively with the USAID Activity Manager and Contracting Officer’s Representative for grant awards and implementation.

1.2 Guiding Principles The following principles will guide MSP’s implementation of its GUC mechanism:

• Partner Driven. New or under-utilized partners require a careful balance of user-friendly and simplified processes for understanding USAID rules and regulations without compromising on compliance or technical quality. A partner-driven approach, one that creates mutual understanding of the incentives and reward structures of the private sector and USAID rule-based assistance, will encourage participation, maximize competition, foster innovation, strengthen cooperation, and deliver positive pre- and post- award experiences.

• Solutions Driven. MSP will drive solutions and deliver operational innovation that meets USAID due diligence requirements, captures learning for adaptive management, and produces market systems results capable of extending beyond the life of the MSP contract (e.g., sustainable partnerships, and effective execution of blended finance and capitalization).

• Clarity. MSP will clearly define roles and responsibilities between DAI, COR, and the buy-in client to define the parameters for collaboration and coordination with grant activities from inception to close. MSP will be honest about what is feasible and can be accomplished within reasonable timeframes.

• Co-creation. MSP will co-create with partners and stakeholders to the maximum extent practicable to deliver reality-based market systems solutions that incentivize action and drive transformational, not transactional, change. Co-creation ultimately leads to greater ownership of outcomes and shared responsibility, more effective and efficient activity implementation, and improved cost efficiencies.

• Avoiding Organizational Conflicts of Interest. MSP will ensure that all potential implementing partners have equal access to information and are working off the same


information when responding to a solicitation. MSP will ensure that solicitations are not written toward the benefit of any particular partner, but rather, to the benefit of the entire market system.

• Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting. Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA) will be applied across all grant activities. MSP’s CLA approach will provide MSP and its partners with the agility needed to adapt as new learning shifts technical focal areas and to adapt from a changing operational environment. Learning will be engineered into grants administration processes to ensure effective and efficient uses of grants assistance and the delivery of higher quality technical products and partnerships.

• Inclusivity. MSP will ensure language incorporated into Annual Program Statements (APS), Notices of Funding Opportunities (NOFO), Broad Agency Announcements (BAA), and Requests for Applications (RFA) are sector, stakeholder, gender, and culturally relevant. MSP will publish announcements in traditional and non-traditional media to engage and attract a diverse and talented pool of actors, organizations, stakeholders, and sectors to participate in grant opportunities.

2. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

2.1 The MSP grants program is designed to be thoroughly integrated into technical activities of USG buy-in initiatives of the project. Grants are awarded based on the strategies defined in specific USG buy-in activities. As a result, the roles and responsibilities in the implementation of each buy-in grant portfolio may be tailored according to the mix of MSP staff best able to support the nature of the activities occurring within the grant. The below roles and responsibilities are defined as essential actors in the entire grants process. These actors are, at minimum, those individuals who can be expected to play a significant role with each buy-in, involving the issuance of grants.

2.1 The Grants Staff are responsible for preparing, supporting and documenting the entire

grants administration process, from conducting market or partner research to the solicitation/application phase through grant award and close-out. The Grants Staff will support the Grants and Subcontracts Manager to ensure grantees are responsible for the ongoing financial and programmatic administration of the award. The Grants Staff are responsible for reviewing and recording advances and expenses for grantees. The Grants Staff are responsible for ensuring that grantees complete all requirements for closeout and that required auditing of files is done on a routine basis.

2.2 The Grants and Subcontracts Manager is responsible for overall management and

oversight of the approved GUC Manual, ensuring compliance with all grant administration procedures, working closely with Engagement Managers to support implementation of grant activities, ensuring grantees meet agreement requirements, and supervising the grants staff for all documentation from design to award to close-out of the grant. The Grants and Subcontracts Manager will oversee proper closure of each award and confirm that all payment requests were paid, and advances cleared for grantees. The Grants and Subcontracts Manager will oversee the entire grant award process, drafting and issuing the Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) in the form of a Request for Application (RFA) and/or Annual Program Statement (APS), ensuring all documentation in TAMIS is archived for each grant, and preparing approval documentation for proposed grantees to USAID, prior to issuing any award. The Grants & Subcontracts Manager will provide oversight through appropriate project staff of the financial management aspects of the award by reviewing reports, correspondence, or other appropriate means. The Grants and Subcontracts Manager will be a key support to Engagement Managers for all buy-in activities involving grants.

2.3 The Engagement Manager is responsible for providing technical requirements of program

statements and assisting in the drafting of selection criteria to the Grants & Subcontracts


Manager for issuing Requests for Application (RFA) or Annual Program Statements (APS). The Engagement Manager will ensure the technical objectives of buy-in scopes of work are captured in grant program awards, supervise grant implementation from a technical perspective, maintain constant communication with the Grants & Subcontracts Manager regarding performance or compliance issues, and review grantee deliverables or achievements for payment authorization. The Engagement Manager will be the principal point of contact for the USAID buy-in Activity Manager and grantee regarding grant implementation. The Engagement Manager will work closely with the Grants and Subcontracts Manager to ensure compliance with grant award requirements.

2.4 The Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) will supervise the Grants and Subcontracts Manager,

develop and oversee a training program for MSP staff in grants administration, prepare and/or review USAID approval requests, and provide high level oversight of grants compliance in accordance with the approved GUC Manual. The Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) will ensure all grant activities conform to approved environmental compliance policies. The DCOP will review NOFOs and may at times serve as committee chair in selection committees. The DCOP will ensure technical objectives are supported by innovative operational approaches and guarantee that grant activities comply with USAID and DAI rules and regulations for authorized use of the grants under contract mechanism under the MSP contract. The DCOP will work closely with the DAI US Contracts Manager for appropriate due diligence checks and streamlined grant approval processes.

2.5 The DAI Bethesda Office of Contracts and Grants is responsible for approving all DAI

templates, providing clearance of the GUC Manual as a deliverable to USAID, and advising the DCOP and COP on grants compliance. The DAI Office of Contracts and Grants will review all grants over $100,000 and submit grants above $100,000 or in-kind grants to local government of any threshold for USAID Contracting Officer (CO) approval.

2.6 The DAI Bethesda Management Systems Team is responsible for customizing the

TAMIS grants module to meet the administrative implementation needs of the project, including ensuring efficient system workflows established in this GUC Manual.

2.7 The Senior Private Sector Engagement (PSE) Advisor will oversee technical direction

of PSE activities pertaining to grants and will supervise Engagement Managers assigned to buy-ins with a strong PSE component. Finally, the Senior Private Sector Engagement Advisor may fulfill the role of Engagement Manager for buy-ins that are heavily focused on PSE and may at times serve as committee chair in selection committees.

2.8 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Manager and Communications

Assistant will both support grantee reporting requirements, data capture for relevant indicator monitoring and analysis, and grantee performance and achievements to USAID, such as success stories or activity reporting in the Semi-Annual Progress Reports.

2.9 The Chief of Party is responsible for ensuring compliance to the overall use of the GUC

mechanism and that project staff are trained on this policy and supporting procedures. The COP may also serve as an Engagement Manager and/or supervise Engagement Managers that focus on MSD activities, as well as serve at times as committee chair on selection committees. The COP will provide principal technical direction over the use of the GUC mechanism and work closely with USAID on defining grants assistance under buy-ins. The COP approves all grants per the Project Schedule of Authorities (PSOA), and signs all final grant agreements, no matter the dollar threshold. In the DAI grants award process, COP approval (or concurrence) is required for the following: program statements, justification for restricted eligibility (concurrence), award selection of grantee, grant awards (approval <


$100,000; concurrence > $100,000) and any modifications to existing grantee agreements and payment requests.

2.10 USAID Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), per section B.5 of the Contract,

will work closely with DAI on all grants management tasks related to each phase of the award process including but not limited to: pre-Solicitation phase; solicitation development; solicitation issuance; applicant conferences; applicant screening; and evaluation of applicants consistent with USAID policies (ADS 303). The COR will review and approve documentation of proposed awardee selection, coherence with USAID stated objectives for use of the GUC mechanism for MSP, and monitoring of grantee performance and close-out of grant award. The COR will provide USAID approval for all grants below $100,000.

2.11 USAID Contracting Officer (CO) approves all grant awards above $100,000 and in-kind

grants to local government of any threshold and applicable modifications unless otherwise stated.

2.12 USAID Activity Manager (Buy-in Client) works closely with the COR and DAI on various grants management tasks related to each phase of the award process for grant interventions pertaining to their specific buy-in mechanism. The role of the USAID Activity Manager will be clearly defined during the pre-award phase of the buy-in.

3. POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES

3.1 Grant Policies 3.1.1 The MSP Grants team will execute a GUC program in accordance with the requirements as

provided in ADS 302.3.4.13 and will adhere to the parameters set forth in this GUC Manual. 3.1.2 MSP is a $65 million, flexible buy-in mechanism that allows USAID MBIOs to efficiently

access the expertise required to develop new private sector engagements; support USAID MBIOs in the design, implementation, and evaluation of PSE and MSD activities; and strengthen learning and capacity in these two critical approaches.

3.1.3 USAID has authorized up to $30 million under the MSP mechanism in GUC to NGOs

including both non-profit and for-profit entities for the entirety of the period of performance.

3.1.4 The flexible buy-in mechanism allows for grant funding to be written into scopes of work for

specific buy-ins, therefore, each buy-in will have its own specific tasks, objectives, and activities for use of MSP grants funding.

3.1.5 USAID received a deviation for this award to increase the threshold for grants under

contracts for U.S.-based nongovernment organizations, both non-profit and for-profit, from $100,000.00 to $500,000.00. The deviation is designed to assist Feed the Future to develop strong partnerships with U.S.-based organizations to get innovative and new technologies in the hands of farmers.

3.1.6 The MSP Grants team will solicit, negotiate, award, and administer grants with the approval of USAID. These grants will be a component of the overall work performed under the contract.

3.1.7 MSP will ensure adequate coordination with buy-in clients, other donor-funded interventions, and implementing partners operating within the buy-in geography to avoid duplication of effort and maximize potential effectiveness.


3.1.8 Under United States Government (USG) agreements, DAI shall follow all applicable laws,

statutes and regulations that govern the use of grants under contracts and cooperative agreements (MSP will not issue cooperative agreements under the GUC mechanism). Similarly, the project shall flow down to the grant agreements any and all mandatory standard provisions according to the type of grant and/or the recipient organization.

3.1.9 MSP will ensure through compliance with these laws and regulations, that all costs are reasonable, allocable, and allowable, and the best use of USG and taxpayer funds.

3.1.10 USAID will collaborate with the Activity to identify grant activities, approve solicitation documents, participate in technical review and evaluation of applications, approve grantees, and review grantee reports or products.

3.1.11 USAID approval is required for all grants (COR approval < $100,000; COR and CO approval > $100,000 or in-kind of any threshold to local government). DAI’s grant approval requests to the COR will be submitted via a COR Action Memo or via an official request letter to the CO. Both types of approval requests will include the program description, the proposed budget or milestone table, and a summary description of the award selection process for the selected applicant if a restriction to eligibility was used from section 5.5.8, below.

3.1.12 Cost modifications increasing the value of an approved grant require USAID approval (CO approval is required if the modification increases the ceiling above $100,000). No-cost modifications to an approved grant require COR approval (e.g., scope of work modification, and period of performance extension).

3.1.13 Table 1 outlines the approval thresholds for grants under contract for the MSP Activity. In all cases, the Chief of Party (COP) is the signatory on the grant agreement itself:

Table 1. Grant Values and Approvals

Grant Value Approval

Below $100,000 COP and USAID COR approval

$100,000 and above COP concurs, DAI/Bethesda and USAID COR concur, USAID CO approves

In-kind grant to local government of any threshold COP and COR concur, USAID CO approves DAI/Bethesda concurs if above $100,000

Cost amendments that increase value from one threshold to the next (>$100,000; <$100,000)

Follow the subsequent threshold approval requirements; CO approves

Cost amendments that increase the value of the grant and significant changes to the program description or the objectives of the grant.

Follow the subsequent threshold approval requirements; CO approves


Transfer funds among cost categories, listed in the award budget, when the cumulative amount of such transfers exceeds 10% of the total award amount and does not increase the overall ceiling of the budget.

COP concurs, DAI/Bethesda Contracts Manager approves

Period of performance amendments with no cost amendments

COP and USAID COR concur

Quantity changes (e.g., Grants in Kind) of goods or services that do not: a) change the total value of the grant and b) are consistent with the program description.

COP approves

3.1.14 USAID reserves the right to direct DAI to unilaterally terminate grants entered into by DAI

for the project activity.

3.1.15 Consistent with USAID's approach, DAI encourages unrestricted competition of grant awards by seeking applications from all eligible and qualified entities and evaluating all applicants fairly and equally, unless there is a strong programmatic rationale to restrict eligibility that outweighs the benefits of a competitive process. Refer to MSP Work Instruction 6 in support of this GUC manual for additional guidance.

3.1.16 Upon signing an agreement with a recipient organization, the project recognizes that it is entering into a partnership for the attainment of mutually acceptable goals of the organization, DAI and the USAID. The project shall demonstrate respect for the recipient organization and ensure that the grant is administered in a fair and transparent manner.

3.1.17 The MSP Grants Team shall ensure that the most current mandatory provisions and certifications as per ADS 303 are included in all grant agreements.

3.1.18 MSP may include international travel or the purchase of equipment in grant budgets as long as the applicable standard provisions for those types of activities are attached to the grant award.

3.1.19 Grant advances will be billable to USAID only if tracked effectively in the monthly project snapshot and administered and reconciled in accordance with MSP Work Instruction15: Cash Disbursements for Grants.

3.1.20 Private sector leverage may be outlined in a separate Memorandum of Understanding or similar agreement document, such as a Letter of Commitment from the grantee.

3.1.21 If program income is anticipated to be generated under the award, DAI will determine

prior to award how that income will be treated and specified in the award. Program income earned under this agreement may be used as follows:

1. With prior client (Contracting Officer) approval, added to funds committed by the client and the recipient to the project or program, and used to further eligible project or program objectives;

2. With prior client (Contracting Officer) approval, used to finance the non-U.S. Government share or Cost Share of the project or program, in which case the amount of the Federal award remains the same; and

3. Deducted from the total project or program allowable cost in determining the net allowable costs on which the federal share of costs is based. If the terms and conditions of the award do not specify how program income is to be used, then option 3 shall apply automatically. Client (Contracting Officer) approval is required to apply the other options. Per RAA 15 of the Standard Provisions for Non-U.S. Nongovernmental Organizations grantees who are commercial or for-profit


organizations may not apply option 1 to their program income. - instead option 3 will apply. This limitation does not apply to FAAs as these types of grants have their own Standard Provisions (ADS 303mat, Standard Provisions for Fixed Amount Awards to Nongovernmental Organizations). Costs incident to the generation of program income may be deducted from gross income to determine program income, provided that these costs have been charged to the award and they comply with the applicable rules for allowable costs under grants. The timeframe for earning program income is any income earned by a grantee during the grant period. “During the grant period” means between the effective date of the grant agreement and the end date of the grant as reflected in the final financial report. Recipients shall have no obligation to the US government regarding program income earned after the end of the project/grant period.

3.1.22 DAI may incentivize the grantee to repay a portion of the grant value, with reported

program income funds. Incentives for an appropriate repayment amount could include additional future funding for expansion or scaling-up applications, loan guarantees or credit references with financial institutions for future investment, or investment promotion referrals. Repayment values, application, and incentives will be determined on a case-by-case basis, as appropriate to the objectives of the grantee, the ability for the grantee to earn program income, and/or the long-term market- based incentives that may be appropriate.

3.1.23 All interest and other refunds by award recipients shall be made to a special, non-

commingled, interest-bearing account established by the project (Separate Account). The project has no beneficial interest in any funds in the Separate Account. Funds in the Separate Account shall be paid annually to USAID, as directed by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). At the conclusion of the contract, any funds remaining in the Separate Account shall be returned to USAID and any interest shall be refunded to the U.S. Government.

3.1.24 A separate bank checking account must be used for depositing and expending the disbursed

funds. The account name must be the official of the grantee. No other funding shall be deposited into this account and no other expenditures shall be paid from this account.

3.1.25 DAI must closely monitor overruns in cost/expenditure categories or main line items. If

major budget shifts are anticipated or observed, a modification is recommended to ensure proper monitoring and avoidance of overruns. Under certain circumstances, and with DAI’s approvals, the grantee may shift budget line items.

3.1.26 All grants shall meet the following minimum criteria:

• Grants may be awarded on both a solicited and unsolicited basis.

• Meet at least one of the MSP Activity objectives, have an approved grants program under a buy-in mechanism for field support functions, ormeet grants authorization requirements as determined by USAID that are within the terms of the MSP contract.

• Contain expected outcomes and results consistent with approved activities.

• Obtain a data universal numbering system (DUNS) number. A DUNS number is required for non-U.S. applications applying for grants in the amount of $25,000 or more. DUNS number is required for U..S. applicants regardless of the grant amount. The award of a grant is contingent upon the winner providing a DUNS number to DAI. Organizations who fail to provide a DUNS number will not receive an agreement and DAI will select an alternate awardee.

• Evidence that the applicant is registered in the Systems for Award Management (SAM)and continues to maintain an active SAM registration, compliant with 2 CFR 25.110, requiring recipients to maintain current information in the SAM at all times


during which it has an active grant or an application or plan under consideration by DAI .

• Provide Articles of Incorporation or other documentation which substantiates the legal character /registration of the entity in country/region of operation.

• Must meet minimum statutory restrictions; SAM check; Terrorism/Special Designated Nationals (SDN)/Blocked Persons/Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)/etc. DAI is prohibited f rom making awards to persons or entities listed in SAM Exclusions pursuant to 2 CFR Part 183 and will insert terms and conditions in grant award agreements regarding the recipient’s responsibilities to ensure no grant funding is provided directly or indirectly to excluded persons or entities.

• Be structured, timely, quantified, and, whenever possible, used in combination with and in order to leverage other financial resources, and in-kind contributions.

• Additionally, grants: o May be awarded for variable amounts and for variable periods; o May come under one or multiple categories of assistance; o May cover all or only a portion of specific activities or costs; o May be used to cover operational or administrative costs of an organization

(such as salaries, honoraria, consulting fees, stipends, travel and per diem, data collection, analysis, communication and document preparation, workshops, conference participation, equipment, and other costs as may be approved)

3.2 Grant Program Objectives 3.2.1 MSP requires an innovative technical approach combined with operational agility and a

commitment to compliance excellence in the administration of grant awards for the MSP Activity.

3.2.2 MSP grants will support any of the four contract objectives. Grants will be primarily designed

to assist buy-in mechanisms to develop and manage effective private sector partnerships by facilitating the co-creation of transformative shared-value partnerships with U.S., multinational, and local firms, investors, civil society organizations, and host-country governments. In this way, grants shall contribute financially to promote and facilitate the achievement of expected project results and do so in a manner that leverages private sector partner cash and in-kind project contributions (see 3.2.5). Since in most cases, an MSP grant will be issued directly to the private sector resource partner, the potential partner will need to demonstrate at the partnership concept phase the projected nature, composition, and channel of its resource contribution to the partnership. The private sector resource contributions will be integrated within the milestone plan or results achievement within the grants agreement. In some cases, grant milestone payments may be triggered by private sector resource expenditure as envisioned in the milestone plan. Private sector resource expenditure, against the projected private sector resources contributions stipulated in the grants agreement, will be verified by MSP as part of its milestone verification process or results achievement.

3.2.3 The MSP grants program will facilitate catalytic changes in agriculture and food systems such

that market actors, including private sector, public sector, and civil society, shift behaviors in transformative ways to promote competitiveness, inclusiveness, and resilience for the broader market system. To achieve systemic change, MSP’s grants design will address systemic constraints, such as weak standards and certification services; pilot new models with potential for transformational impact; and integrate crosscutting aspects, including strengthening social inclusion and building resilience to shocks and stressors, such as conflict and climate change.


Potential grants activities could include piloting new blended-finance mechanisms, such as providing catalytic capital to attract private capital for commercializing agricultural technologies; partnering to improve social inclusion, environmental sustainability, and operational transparency along supply chains; testing new business models to reach base-of-the-pyramid markets; and using USAID’s convening power to develop dialogue platforms to address policy and regulatory constraints.

3.2.4 MSP grants that support private sector partnerships will evaluate the prospective

development impact of proposed partnerships to assess whether MSP’s potential grant investment will mobilize significant and responsible private investment for development; is critical to unlocking a market-led solution; and contributes to industry-influencing public learning. MSP will pay particular attention to:

1. Feasibility: The partnership should have well-defined and achievable objectives. The

enabling environment and the proposed combination of partner assets, resources, and expertise should be sufficient to yield significant impact on a specific and important development challenge. Financial and technical approaches must be viable. In addition, the involvement of local partners and/or beneficiaries in the development and implementation of the alliance should be clear and sufficient enough to indicate the alliance will be successful. 2

2. Sustainability: The partnership should demonstrate the potential to yield sustainable solutions to the development challenge being addressed. The private sector resource partner should express a business case that demonstrates their long-term vision and commitment to the targeted markets and communities. The partnership concept should demonstrate that the prospective firm or investor partner has “skin in the game” by making a significant financial and human capital investment in the proposed partnership. In addition, the proposed partnership should engage and strengthen the human and institutional capacity of local partners. 3

3. Scalability: MSP will consider whether and how the proposed approaches can be scaled

or replicated in a manner that would offer a broader set of impacts at the national, regional or global level.4

3.2.5 MSP grants may be used in conjunction with technical assistance (STTA, core subcontractor

support, and procurement). In certain cases, technical assistance accompaniment could help to reduce risks, strengthen capacity of local partners, prove the business case for new models, facilitate entry into new markets, capture learning, and incentivize investments resulting in expanded market opportunities and services, and improved access.

3.2.6 All grants will include CLA approaches. Pause and reflect sessions will be built into program

statements and organized quarterly with buy-in clients, stakeholders, and partners. The sessions will capture learning and inform changes in the operating environment, allowing grant activities to be adaptive in nature. If necessary, the grant will be modified or amended based on testing and feedback from partners, stakeholders, USAID, and buy-in clients.

3.2.7 CLA and adaptive management is integral to the achievement of MSP objectives, and

technical teams may need to modify a grant award or make multiple, iterative grants to a single MSP grant recipient in line with CLA best practices. Adaptations will be made to meet

2 USAID Global Development Alliance Annual Program Statement 2016-2018, APS No: APS-OAA-16-000001, USAID and the Private Sector: Partnering for Impact 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid.


the needs of specific country contexts or pivots in buy-in client strategies. Individual cases will be discussed and agreed to by the COR and with the involvement of the USAID Activity Manager. Modifications to grant activities will follow requisite approvals (see Table 1).

3.2.8 The following best practices will be applied in MSP’ grant development:

✓ Explain the proposal process to potential grantees at applicant’s meetings much like USAID does for large awards. This will allow applicants to ask questions and provide DAI an opportunity to outline the application process and expectations, due dates, and what types of awards organizations can expect.

✓ Ensure templates are clear and user-friendly to applicants, especially for submitting technical and budget forms. The forms shall capture information relevant to established selection criteria and project reporting requirements.

✓ Budgets shall show break down of lump sum costs to ensure accurate reviews of cost reasonableness, understood by both DAI and the Grantee.

✓ Award mechanism selection—Standard, Simplified, Blended, In-Kind, Fixed Amount—must clearly align with the grantee’s capability and the technical design of the grant activity. Neglecting this will set the grant activity up for failure.

✓ Avoid overly complex or intricate awards:

o Avoid making one grant dependent on another grantee’s work, no matter how much the two are inter-connected. The delay of one grantee could seriously impair the performance of the other and result in unreasonable cost delays.

o Avoid creating unachievable milestones or results; they must be measurable, verifiable, timely, and reasonable.

o Avoid at all costs allowing grantees to make a third-tier award unless they are an experienced international or local NGO. DAI loses control of the third tier grantee’s work.

✓ Prioritize which grants go first. For example, if seed planting is required by a certain time, award grants first for seeding before grant awards are made to marketing or nutrition grantees which are less time sensitive.

✓ Avoid grants that are heavy on equipment and avoid the procurement of vehicles; these types of costs need to be scrutinized very carefully and justified. Only if they are essential to achieving results should they be considered for inclusion into the grant. Be mindful of client approvals and their timing.

✓ Avoid grants where organizations plan to hire additional long-term staff to carry out activities. To be sustainable, the grantee must prioritize use of its long-term staff to carry out the work and to grow the organization’s model. The organization must be prepared to maintain staff levels when funding is reduced.

3.2.9 MSP will always prioritize good relationship management and will utilize principles from USAID’s Relationship Health Score Card to cultivate positive and productive relationships between corporate partners and USAID that endure beyond the life of a single partnership transaction.

3.3 Policy Implementation 3.3.1. The MSP grants manual, grant agreement templates, and any modifications to this GUC

manual shall be approved by the DAI Bethesda Office of Contracts. Any modification to the GUC Manual must be approved by USAID.


3.3.2. The MSP Activity team shall use TAMIS for management of their grants program. 3.3.2. The staff and partners implementing the Activity shall maintain high standards of ethical

conduct in the solicitation, negotiation, award, implementation, and oversight of MSP project activities.

3.3.4 The following diagram illustrates the grant making process and the key procedures MSP has in

place to implement these grant management policies.

4. PROPOSAL MANAGEMENT

4.1 It is DAI policy to require all grants to be awarded competitively unless an exception is

authorized. The competition requirement is met when an announcement is published (see Section C Procedure 1 of this MSP GUC Manual for additional guidance). Recommendations for awards are made following an impartial review and evaluation of all applications.

4.2 It is DAI policy to ensure maximum competition by seeking applications from all eligible and

qualified entities. Establishing a two or more-tiered level of competition (e.g., prequalification round) is in keeping with this policy, as long as applications are reviewed in a fair manner at each level. Competition may also be limited to local or regional organizations for appropriate activity buy-in mechanisms.

4.3 Applications for grants shall fall into one of three categories:

Applications solicited through public notification for a specified program or support activity;

Applications solicited directly from pre-selected potential grantees (NGOs, Public

International Organizations (PIO), US NGOs and US Private Sector Firms etc.) for a specific activity; and

Unsolicited applications for grants that support the broad objectives of the project shall be reviewed on an ongoing basis.

4.3.1 All grants shall require an application concept paper, or mini-application (for small/micro

economic grants) and will undergo a documented review and approval process. All grant solicitations and applications, whether funded or rejected, shall be retained on file.

Proposal Management

Procedure 1: Solicitation and Award of Grants

Grant Award Management

Procedure 2: Grant Administration, Management and Reporting

Wrapping Up the Grant

Procedure 3: Closing Out Grants


4.3.2 All information received from applicants shall be considered proprietary and held in strict confidence by those individuals who review it to protect the integrity and privacy rights of the grant applicant.

4.3.3 In appropriate situations, DAI may invite a relevant buy-in client, partner, or stakeholder to participate in reviewing concept papers received either in response to a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) or unsolicited concept papers. In such cases, they will be asked to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and certify that they do not have a perceived or actual conflict of interest with any organization submitting a concept paper. Partners and/or stakeholders may be non-voting members. The USAID COR, USAID Activity Manager, or Buy-In client is welcome to join DAI as an observer during either the concept paper review or grant evaluation committee phases and could be voting members.

4.4 DAI examines any potential awardee to ensure that the organization has adequate management, financial and internal controls systems to ensure implementation of and compliance with their grant agreement. This information shall be used for determining the appropriate type and value of the grant and may be used to determine any special conditions or requirements. This information will also be used to determine if any additional capacity building/business acceleration initiatives are needed and appropriate. DAI documents this examination process for each potential awardee.

4.5 Prior to Grant Award, MSP team screens all potential grant activities for potential environmental impacts and strives to incorporate the integration of gender and youth as a cross-cutting theme in its grant program. If there is a potential for environmental impacts, the Activity will conduct an environmental review in accordance with MSP’s approved environmental management policy and in coordination with the COR and USAID Activity Manager.

4.6 Negotiations: The grants team, together with the relevant Engagement Manager when

applicable, will negotiate the award (milestones, reports needed, etc.) and its budget with the applicant. The grant budget is reviewed and negotiated to ensure costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable; are compliant with USAID policies and 2 CFR 200 subpart E; and properly supports the proposed technical activities. For grants that include in-kind elements, the grants team will coordinate to obtain quotations and estimates to be included in the award budget. The team will also review program income, cost-share, grantee contribution, and leveraged funds as described below, if applicable, and will ensure it is applied in accordance with relevant ADS 303 regulations, including the relevant Standard Provisions.

5. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Eligible Organizations 5.1.1. MSP grant support may be extended to U.S. organizations (up to $500,000 as per MSP

contract deviation5), non-U.S. not-for-profit and for-profit NGOs, Public International Organizations, associations, financial institutions, business service organizations, industry/sector, trade or other private sector associations, civil society organizations, community groups, media, educational and training institutions.

5.2 Eligible Activities

5 USAID has received a deviation for the MSP award to increase the threshold for grants under contracts for U.S.-based nongovernment organizations, both non-profit and for-profit, from $100,000.00 to $500,000.00. The deviation is designed to

assist Feed the Future develop strong partnerships with U.S.-based organizations to get innovative and new technologies in the hands of farmers.


5.2.1 Grant activities funded by MSP will fall under approved buy-in initiatives or as otherwise instructed by USAID. Each individually approved NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA will further specify activities to be funded.

5.2.2 Grants supported by MSP must be pursuant to buy-in activity objectives set forth in the relevant NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA. The proposed activities may be the sole or primary work of an organization, or a special dimension or function of an organization largely dedicated to other projects

5.2.3 Grants will cover only necessary and allowable costs linked to the execution of the activity, such as program staff salaries, consultant fees, training, meetings and seminars, publications, purchase and/or rental of equipment, office and travel expenses, and other direct costs. The specific costs to be funded under MSP must conform to the USAID guidelines for funding activities.

5.2.4. Grant activities flagged by the MSP environmental policy will also cover costs associated with mitigating the environmental impact of grant activities. These mitigation measures should clearly outline associated resource needs.

5.2.5. Activities can only begin upon signature of the agreement between the applicant and DAI. Costs incurred before execution of the agreement (including signed certifications and assurances) will not be reimbursed unless agreed upon in writing.

5.3 Ineligible Organizations

5.3.1 MSP grant support may not be extended to the following types of organizations:

o Any entity that has been found to have misused USAID funds in the past; o Political parties, groupings, or institutions or their subsidiaries and affiliates; o Organizations that advocate or promote anti-democratic policies or illegal

activities; o Faith-based organizations whose objectives are for discriminatory and religious

purposes, and whose main objective for the grant is of a religious nature; o Any entity included in any supplementary information concerning prohibited

individuals or entities that may be provided by USAID; o Any entity whose name appears in the System of Award Management (SAM) with an

active exclusion; and o Any organization that refuses to sign all required certifications and assurances.

5.4 Ineligible Activities and Unallowable Costs

5.4.1 Unallowable costs are further described in Subpart E-Cost Principles in 2 CFR 200 for non-profit organizations and FAR 31.2 “Cost principles for Commercial Organizations” for for-profit organizations. All costs must be reasonable, allocable, and allowable.

Grant funds cannot be used for the following:

o Private ceremonies, parties, celebrations, or "representation" expenses. o Purchases of restricted goods, such as certain agricultural commodities, motor

vehicles (including motorcycles), pharmaceuticals and contraceptive items, pesticides, used equipment, U.S. government excess property and fertilizers without the previous approval by the USAID CO.

o Prohibited goods under USAID regulations, including but not limited to: military and

surveillance equipment, police or law enforcement equipment, abortion equipment and services, weather modification equipment, luxury goods, and gambling equipment.

o Purchases of goods or services restricted or prohibited under the prevailing

USAID source/nationality regulations per 22 CFR 228 and relevant Standard


Provisions; or from countries or suppliers as may be identified by USAID's consolidated list of debarred, suspended, or ineligible subcontractors at www.sam.gov.

o Any purchases or activities deemed unnecessary to accomplish grant purposes as

determined by DAI, including any grantee headquarters expenses that are not directly linked to the implementation of the proposed program.

o Previous obligations and/or bad debts. o Fines and/or penalties. o Creation of endowments.

o Other costs unallowable under USAID and/or federal regulations, such as alcoholic beverages.

o Indirect costs such as but not limited to overhead or indirect fringe (unless the

applicant has documented proof of such rates through audits or USAID-issued NICRA). Additionally, a 10% de minimis indirect rate on Modified Total Direct Costs can be applied to local organizations which have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate from the U.S. government). Indirect costs are never allowed under simplified grants.

5.5 Restricted Eligibility

5.5.1 Unrestricted eligibility refers to a grant opportunity that is open to all entities. 5.5.2 Restricted eligibility refers to:

• A funding opportunity that is limited to a specific type of entity or otherwise narrows the pool of applicants that may compete for a grant.

• An award of other assistance action that is limited to one or a limited number of recipients

• Amendments to extend an award.

• Amendments to increase the total estimated amount of the award.

• Or amendments that change the fundamental scope of the original award objectives.

5.5.3 Competition and the requirements regarding restricting eligibility do not apply to awards or amendments that:

• Are not federal financial assistance as defined in 2CFR 200.40. This includes agreements with public international organizations (see ADS 308), bilateral development partners (see ADS 350 and ADS 351), and awards or solicitations using other transaction authorities;

• Are entirely funded by non-appropriated funds (for example, gifts received by USAID from bilateral and multilateral donors, host governments, or the private sector); or

• Are based on an unsolicited application (see ADS 303.3.5.5)

5.5.4 Consistent with USAID's approach, DAI encourages unrestricted competition of grant

awards by seeking applications from all eligible and qualified entities, unless there is a strong programmatic rationale to restrict eligibility that outweighs the benefits of a competitive process.

5.5.5 Under US government funded GUC, noncompetitive awards shall be justified in writing, to

the satisfaction of the USAID Contracting Officer in accordance with ADS 303.3.6.5. MSP will provide the Justification to Restrict Eligibility in the Grant Request for USAID approval.

http://www.sam.gov/

http://www.sam.gov/


Eligibility cannot be restricted on the basis of: ▪ Personal preference, for example, personal relationships with key personnel, the

perceived burden of a competitive process, or other non-programmatic rationales; ▪ Avoidance of mobilization costs; or ▪ Lack of adequate planning

5.5.6 The nature of MSP may provide special circumstances that cause deviations to the

standard competition procedures for grants administration. Such instances will require a clear justification for the absence of competition under grants as stated in ADS 303.3.6.5.

5.5.7 Grants awarded with restricted eligibility will still be subject to evaluation by a Selection

Committee. In cases when a potential grantee and activity has been identified by a technical lead, a concept paper or an application will be submitted by the applicant and presented to MSP for evaluation. The grants team will make the determination if a potential grantee will proceed directly with the application or with a two-tiered approach of a concept paper and then application.

5.5.8 The following restrictions listed below are the most common justifications for restricting

eligibility. All justifications for restrictions to eligibility will be documented in writing in the grant memorandum of negotiation and included in the grant file.

The complete list of justifications to restrict eligibility is found at ADS 303.3.6.5. DAI may utilize any one of the following:

Table 2. Restricted Eligibility Examples Restricted Eligibility Basis Description

Pre-approved Conditions • Eligibility will be limited to organizations that have less than $25 million in USAID funding, at any tier, over the

past five years; or for global health awards the organization has received less than $25 million in US

Government funding at any tier, over the past five years. This restriction cannot be used to restrict eligibility to a

single organization.

• The award is at or below simplified acquisition threshold with no time restriction (for FAA time restriction see W.I. 12.20). This restriction should generally not be used

to restrict eligibility to a single organization; however, if there are unique circumstances that support an award to

a single organization, that circumstance must be documented in the Negotiation Memo, approved by the

assigned Contracts Manager, and included in the award file.

• The award is at or below simplified acquisition threshold with no time restriction (for FAAs, see time restriction in W.I. 12.20). This restriction should generally not be used

to restrict eligibility to a single organization; however, if there are unique circumstances that support an award to

a single organization, that circumstance must be documented in the Negotiation Memo, approved by the

assigned DAI US Contracts Manager, and included in the award file.

Programmatic Purposes • A written determination (documented in the

Negotiation Memo and approved by the assigned Contracts Manager for GUCs above $100,000 and by

Deputy Chief of Party for GUCs below $100,000) to restrict eligibility can be based on programmatic


purposes. The determination must provide the programmatic rationale for restricting eligibility

consistent with ADS 303.3.6.5, and support how the rationale outweighs DAI's policy preference for, and the

benefits of, an unrestricted competitive process.

• Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricted

eligibility include : increasing USAID’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not

previously received a direct award from USAID ; accessing specialized skills or experience through an

award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized

facilities, or unique relationship with market actors or the host government ; responding to a disaster, violent

conflict, political crisis or other emergency that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted

competition can accommodate ; and/or developing a promising science or technology concept or a unique,

innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.

Unsolicited Applications • The application must be submitted solely on the applicant's initiative without any prior formal or informal

solicitation. Awards may be made where the application clearly demonstrates a unique, innovative, or proprietary

capability: represents appropriate use of Activity funds to support or stimulate a public purpose: and fits within the

existing Activity’s strategic objective as determined by the DPI along with the COP. The burden of proof that

the application is indeed "unique" and “unsolicited” (i.e., is submitted without prior formal or informal

solicitation) rests with the Activity and must be documented.

5.5.9 Grant Amendments: A justification for restricted eligibility is not required if the grant

amendment is strictly for administrative purposes, including: o Incremental funding actions; o Changes which do not require:

✓ An increase to the total estimated amount of the award, or ✓ A substantive change to the program description;

o A no-cost time extension; or o An extension authorized under 2 CFR 200.308(d)(2).

6. RISK ASSESSMENT

6.1 Pre-Award Risk Assessment (Financial and Administrative Assessment)

6.1.1 As part of responsibility determination, DAI conducts a pre-award risk assessment to examine if a potential awardee has adequate management, financial and internal controls to successfully implement and comply with their grant agreement.

6.1.2 Per ADS 303.3.9, the recommendation or selection of an application for award by the

Selection Committee does not guarantee the award submission to USAID. The COP and/or the DAI/Bethesda Contracts Manager (based on threshold) make the final determination on the award and must be fully satisfied that the applicant has the capacity to adequately perform the award.


6.1.3 The grants team along with other members of MSP (i.e. finance, operations, technical advisors, engagement managers), will complete DAI’s grantee capability questionnaire (MSP Form 3 Financial Capability Questionnaire), meeting with the applicant’s staff to learn more about the administrative and financial management systems, including overall systems, financial management practices and procedures, timesheets, travel, operations, monitoring and evaluation, etc.

6.1.4 Under continued COVID-19 travel restrictions, pre-award risk assessments will be done

virtually. If a local consultant is available to assist with in-person visits and there are no host country and/or DAI restrictions against making such visits, the consultant may proceed with the visit, following all public health safety recommendations—i.e. mask wearing and social distancing

6.1.5 The nature of the pre-award risk assessment will depend on the grant type, amount,

duration, whether advances are authorized, and the capacity of the potential grantee. The pre-award risk assessment will establish if the grantee has the necessary management and technical competence to carry out the grant. No grant shall be awarded unless MSP makes a positive determination or suggests mitigating measures regarding the management, technical, financial and administrative capacity of the organization.

6.1.6 The information gathered from the pre-award risk assessment must substantiate that the

applicant:

• Has systems that comply with USAID’s accountability and reporting requirements, including 2 CFR 200, Subpart E as applicable. If MSP determines that the applicant’s administrative and financial systems are not in compliance with USAID requirements, the applicant must adopt and implement the systems recommended by MSP to be eligible for a grant award, or propose and implement other mitigating measures;

• Has the ability to comply with the award conditions, taking into account all existing and currently prospective commitments of the applicant;

• Has a satisfactory record of performance. Past relevant unsatisfactory performance is ordinarily sufficient to justify a finding of non-responsibility, unless there is clear evidence of subsequent satisfactory performance; and,

• Has a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics and is otherwise qualified and eligible to receive a grant under applicable laws and regulations.

6.1.7 The following documents are required to be collected for every pre-award risk

assessment as well as the additional information as applicable below:

• SAM check;

• Signed copy of the applicable statutory and regulatory certifications in ADS 303.3.8; and,

• Reference checks to assess the applicant’s history of receiving past USAID-funded grants or cooperative agreements, if applicable, or other relevant performance. Previous experience with USAID is not one of the grantee evaluation criteria. MSP must validate the applicant’s past performance reference information based on existing evaluations to the maximum extent possible, and make a reasonable, good faith effort to contact all references to verify or corroborate the following:

✓ How well an applicant performed; ✓ The relevancy of the work performed under the program; ✓ Instances of good performance; ✓ Instances of poor performance; ✓ Significant achievements;


✓ Significant problems; and ✓ Any indications of excellent or exceptional performance in the most

critical areas. 6.1.8 Different documents are required for a risk assessment depending on whether the

applicant has had previous relationships with USAID (not via direct awards) or is new to USAID, or whether it is US or a non-US NGO. The specific documents required are outlined in the following sections.

6.2 Risk Assessment for Non-US Organizations

6.2.1 The following is the list of required documents for Risk Assessments for Non-US Organizations that have been grantees or subcontractors under USAID (not via direct awards) or other US Government Acquisition of Assistance Instruments.

6.2.2. In addition to references and the applicant’s self-assessment form, to make a risk assessment

for a non-U.S. organization that has been previously determined responsible by USAID or another U.S. Government Agency, MSP may rely on the following information:

• Audits performed in accordance with USAID regulations (if the grantee expends

$750,000 or more per their fiscal year, per mandatory standard provision “Accounting, Audit and Records”);

• Signed copy of the applicable statutory and regulatory certifications in ADS 303.3.8; • Quality of the applicant’s history of performance on similar projects, including

compliance with the terms and conditions of the funding agreement, and; • Other information as may be necessary and appropriate, including a pre-award

survey of the applicant’s administrative and financial systems. 6.3 Risk Assessment for Organizations New to USAID or Organizations with

Outstanding Audit Findings. 6.3.1 Before making an award, the grants team shall conduct a pre-award risk assessment and

obtain the following information from organizations that fit in this category, when appropriate:

• Copies of the applicant’s audited financial statements for the last three-year period,

which a certified public accountant or other auditor satisfactory to USAID has audited, if applicable.

• Projected budget, cash flow, and organization charts. • Copies of applicable policies and procedures (for example, accounting, purchasing,

property management, personnel), if the grants team determines that they are necessary.

6.3.2 Depending on the result of the risk assessment, the grants team may make the following

recommendations to the COP or his/her designee: • The grant application is approved as presented

• The grant application is not approved • The grant application is approved in a reduced amount and/or with specific conditions • A different grant type is recommended or selected

6.3.3 The risk assessment and financial assessment will state what steps, if any, are necessary to bring the applicant's administrative and financial systems into full compliance with DAI and USAID standards for control and accountability of funds (i.e. specific conditions). Prior to disbursing the first advance or reimbursement tranche, the grants team will confirm


whether the grantee has adopted and/or implemented the recommended systems and procedures, if any, in order to exercise effective control over, and accountability for, funds, property, and other program assets.

6.4 Grantee Capacity and Specific Conditions 6.4.1 High Risk Grantees. If the grant evaluation committee determines that the MSP staff cannot

make a positive risk determination for a grantee, the grantee will be classified as a high-risk organization per ADS 303.3.9.2. The Grants & Subcontract Manager will report the findings with recommendation to not make an award or make a special award with the following conditions: 1) additional financial reporting detail or frequency; and 2) providing technical assistance and /or training to the grantee. This option may be used only for such a period of time until the potential recipient can correct any institutional deficiencies, but not for the life of the award.

6.4.2 Some local organizations and institutions may be considered strategic partners for MSP but

classified as high-risk grantees due to limited institutional capacity to manage funds. When partnering with these organizations, as applicable, MSP will consider the potential risks associated with each grantee and work to mitigate these risks to the maximum extent possible.

6.4.3 As a risk mitigation measure, DAI may impose specific conditions as defined in ADS

303.3.9.2, which can include requirements such as the creation of written human resources procedures or procurement policies, frequent financial reporting, additional technical assistance, and training. In such instances, the conditions will follow the requirements outlined in ADS 303 and will be detailed in the grant agreement. Once the condition has been satisfied and its conditions have been met, the MSP COP may approve removing the condition via written modification to the award.

7. GRANT AWARD MANAGEMENT

7.1. Grants may be awarded to private sector, Micro, Small, Medium Enterprises (MSMEs),

financial institutions, associations, civil society partners, local host country registered and private sector organizations, non-government organizations (U.S. registered, international, national, and local), public international organizations, training and educational institutions. Grants may not be awarded to government entities, unless the grant is in-kind. MSP shall not have a maximum grant award ceiling, but the following threshold requirements should be noted:

✓ For work performed outside the US, FAR clause 52.222-50, Combatting Trafficking in Persons (TIP), shall be incorporated into sub-award agreements. If a grant is above $500,000 and implemented outside of the U.S., the grantee must complete TIP (Trafficking in Persons) trainings and create a TIP compliance plan, certify it annually, and must receive materials and orientation appropriate for their level of capacity. A copy of all grantee TIP compliance plan certifications shall be maintained on file as per the Project Record Map.

✓ If the grant is above $750,000, the grantee must be independently audited. Pursuant to the Standard Provision entitled Accounting, Audit and Records (October 2017), if the Grantee expends more than US $750,000 in all USAID awards (either directly or through another USAID contractor or recipient) and excluding fixed price contracts and fixed amount awards federal grant funds in the Grantee’s fiscal year, the Grantee shall conduct an annual audit; the cost of which may be paid from the grant. To comply with these guidelines, the project will, when necessary; include


“audit costs” in the approved grant budget. The project may also retain the services of an auditing firm to conduct these audits.

✓ Once the Grant Manual, the Grant Agreement Templates, and the grants section are developed, grant agreements under $100,000 may be administered without DAI/Bethesda approval (grants below $100,000 still require USAID COR approval; and in-kind grants to local government of any threshold require COR and CO approval).

✓ Grants shall be awarded to entities that meet the general outlined criteria (found above in Section 5) and any customized criteria defined in an MSP buy-in or NOFO.

7.2 An appropriate grant type will be selected based on the nature and length of the grant activity, estimated value of the grant, capacity of the grantee, whether the applicant needs advance funding, or will be paid on a cost reimbursement basis, whether the applicant's administrative and financial systems are adequate to meet USAID accountability and reporting requirements, and other conditions, as prescribed in ADS 303.3.24. It is expected that the grants to be awarded by MSP will include:

• In-Kind Grants (GIK). The direct purchase and delivery of equipment or other physical asset and/or services (including expert services) to the grantee on non-cash basis. DAI makes purchases directly with vendors (contracting and payment) for supplies and/or services which are provided to the grantee. No cash is provided to the grantee. DAI manages the procurement and award of goods and services provided in-kind, based on its own procurement policies and procedures.

• Fixed Amount Awards (FAA). The payment for completion of well-defined milestones. Fixed amount payments made upon grantee’s satisfactory achievement of milestones. Milestones and costs shall be specifically identified, and milestones must be in harmony with the grantee’s Program Description.

• Simplified Grants. Streamlined approach to the issuance of small grants under the simplified acquisition threshold. Payments will be made by reimbursement, based on actual costs incurred, identified in the approved budget, and reported by the grantee.

• Standard Grants. Reimbursement of an organization’s actual costs. Issued to more developed organizations that possess documented management capacity as determined by the Pre-Award Responsibility Determination. Procurement of goods and services by the grantee must be done in accordance with their own procurement policies and procedures. The grantee may request reimbursement of indirect costs, consistent with 2 CFR 200.414(f).

• Blended Grants - A blended grant is a type of grant issued when an applicant submits a proposal and is selected to receive two different grant types for programmatic reasons (e.g., a determination that project objectives will be advanced through the provision of cash support to an applicant with a highly responsive proposal which will also require the addition of in-kind contributions to ensure overall success), and the two grant types are blended into one. The only two grant types that DAI allows to be blended are a Fixed Amount Award (FAA) and an In-Kind grant.

7.3 All grants awarded under MSP’s grant program shall include the following standard clause:

“The Contractor/Recipient is reminded that U.S. Executive Orders and U.S. law prohibits transactions with, and the provision of resources and support to, individuals and organizations associated with terrorism. It is the legal responsibility of the contractor/ recipient to ensure compliance with these Executive Orders and laws.” This provision shall be included in all sub-contracts/sub-awards issued under this subcontract/agreement.

7.4 The grantee shall also be required to sign the certification regarding terrorist financing and may be required to sign other certifications, such as the certification regarding the


prohibition assistance to drug trafficking. Support of international travel or the purchase of equipment having a useful life over one year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more may be authorized as long as the applicable Standard Provisions for those types of costs are attached to the simplified grant format.

7.5 It is USAID policy that English shall be the official language of all award documents. If an award or any supporting documents are also provided in a foreign language it must be stated in each version that the English language version is the only official version (see ADS 303.3.20).

7.6 The project shall monitor the performance of each grantee in coordination with the USAID COR or Designee when available on the achievement of grant outputs and/or milestones. The project shall maintain a file for each grant awarded.

7.7 MSP will schedule a kickoff meeting with each grantee to explain the award document in detail, emphasizing the performance schedule, budget, and any relevant safety considerations for activity implementation. The Engagement Manager will maintain regular communication with grantees to foster good working relationships, and to keep the USAID buy-in Activity Manager up-to-date, as necessary. The Engagement Manager will ensure strong monitoring, reporting, learning and adaptation systems are in place.

7.8. The project shall comply with inventory management policies and procedures for procuring non-expendable and expendable items on behalf of grantees, or those purchased directly by the grantee under their grant agreement, which can be found in DAI’s FOM Policy 9.0 Governing Policy on Procurement and Inventory Management and Procedure 9.6 Inventory Management.

7.9 Under FAA, the grantee may need to procure equipment or supplies (excluding real property) for its own use or for beneficiaries of its program in order to accomplish a milestone. However, it is only when the purchase of equipment or supplies is itself the milestone and such purchase is specifically named in that milestone that the recipient must comply with USAID source and nationality rules (22 CFR 228) (see USAID policy in ADS 310 and ADS 312). Otherwise, purchases of the recipient that are incidental to the recipient’s completion of a milestone are not deemed “financed” by the fixed amount award notwithstanding that their costs were included in the estimate upon which the total amount of the fixed amount award was negotiated.

8. WRAPPING UP THE GRANT

8.1 DAI shall not award any grant for a period that extends beyond the estimated completion date of the project. The terms of all grants shall allow for an orderly close-out prior to the expiration date of DAI’s contract.

8.2 DAI and/or USAID shall reserve the right to terminate a grant, in whole or part, or suspend

payments, should the grantee become insolvent during the performance of the award or should the grantee not meet their responsibilities as set forth in the Grant Agreement.

8.3 USAID has the right to terminate the grant activity (activities) unilaterally in extraordinary

circumstances. 8.4 USAID reserves the right to conduct financial reviews or audits, and to otherwise ensure

the adequate accountability of organizations expending its funds. The project’s grant files shall contain the essential documents to demonstrate that the grant was successfully completed, an inventory of all equipment and goods purchased under each grant, and that funds were spent prudently with all costs justified.


8.5 Site visits are an important part of effective award management. If and when deemed safe, joint site visits by MSP technical staff, the USAID buy-in Activity Manager, and/or other USAID staff are encouraged. Site visits can be an effective review of the grant activity. If site visits are not permissible due to health concerns, MSP will review the possibility of a virtual site visit or discuss with the USAID Activity Manager alternatives for a physical visit, such as hiring a local consultant or conducting site visits by the USAID Activity Manager from within a vehicle, if possible . A brief report highlighting the findings will be completed and included in the grant file.

8.6. Grants are subject to the provisions established and included in each award.

8.7 Best practices for closing out grants include:

✓ Grants should be closed out three months prior to the end of the MSP Activity. ✓ Carefully ensure that the proper documentation is on file, including any approvals

required from USAID ✓ Understand the difference between a “closed” grant (interim stage) and a “closed

out” grant (final step). ✓ Hold a close-out meeting with the grantee to capture lessons learned and where

things may be improved to continually adapt and improve grant administration. ✓ If the grantee is permitted by the government and or their own organization to have

limited essential access to their office during COVID-19, provide them with a one-time list of documents (or sample size) that would be needed for final payment, so they do not need to continue returning to their office for final documentation needs.

✓ If final verification/audit cannot be done during COVID-19, consider extending the period of the grant one or two more months until such time that access to the office may be possible.


C. PROCEDURE 1: SOLICITATION AND

AWARD OF GRANTS

1. Purpose and Scope

1.1 The procedures for the solicitation and award of grants under the MSP Activity will utilize either a one- or two-stage process, complying with the policies as stated in Section B of this GUC Manual.

1.2 The overall purpose is to ensure competition in the award of grants to the maximum extent practicable unless an exception is authorized or if it is to fulfill a specific requirement set forth by USAID or the buy-in client.

1.3 In either the one-stage or the two-stage process MSP will integrate co-creation whenever possible, either by holding a co-creation workshop with grant applications or by co-creating the final grant application with the grantee after award selection.

1.4 Under each stage, MSP will identify potential applications through public advertisements and/or up-front market analysis depending on the requirements of the buy-in. Only in exceptional circumstances will a Justification for Restricted Eligibility be considered.

2. Process 2.1 To meet grant program objectives MSP requires an innovative approach to its grants award

administration. MSP will prioritize co-design and co-financing performance-based grants. When appropriate, technical assistance may be used in accompaniment with grant activities.

2.2 At the start of any PSE Mission buy-in, MSP will discuss with the originating Operating Unit

whether to conduct a market analysis to inform the solicitation design for partnership concepts. That market analysis may be built upon existing assessments and analyses or might range from very light-touch or more involved market analysis, depending on a Mission’s resources, interest, and timeline. Such efforts may include end market research, systems mapping, private sector landscape assessments, event hosting, market actor interviews, or otherwise. MSP will subsequently use information and insights from these assessments to ground solicitation design for partnership concepts within the market system. Procurement solicitations may target certain categories of firms or investors or may be open to all types of partners. Partnership solicitations will ask potential partners to flag critical points of engagement with key market actors and to articulate a vision for systemic change within their proposals.

2.3 MSP will identify local and international partners through competitive selection processes. MSP will utilize the following two processes for partnership engagement and award of grants:

2.3.1 Single-Stage Process. MSP develops and releases a NOFO/Annual Program Statement (APS), Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), or Request for Application (RFA) using ideas learned from the upfront market analysis, buy-in client meetings, assessments, partner


meetings, interviews, and regular CLA management processes. In some cases, the USAID Activity Manager may co-develop the program statement with MSP.

i. Interested prospective partners respond to the NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA and submit full applications.

ii. Selection committee recommends award to a successful applicant. iii. MSP co-creates with the successful applicant, sometimes alongside the USAID

Activity Manager, before the grant is proposed to MSP CORs for award.

2.3.2 Two-Stage Process. MSP develops a two-stage APS / NOFO or BAA that describes how MSP intends to engage eligible partners for specific activities. The APS/NOFO will be used when a grant award is envisioned for future award. The BAA will be used when it is undetermined at the time of release whether a grant or procurement is the appropriate mechanism for future award. Neither the APS/NOFO or BAA guarantees award funding. Both will be developed within an established time period and will identify what types of support are available.

ii. Prospective MSP partners submit a concept note in response to the APS/NOFO or BAA and are selected through a competitive process by a selection committee based on approved selection criteria published in the APS/NOFO or BAA. The concept note is the first stage of a two-stage process.

iii. The selected partner(s) is/are invited to co-create in collaboration with the MSP team, stakeholders, USAID, and the Activity Manager.

iv. For the BAA process, the COP or DCOP may determine that an acquisition (subcontract) award or STTA is more appropriate. Not all BAAs will result in grants funding.

v. Prior to awarding grant funding MSP issues an (RFA) to the previously selected potential grantees that participated in the co-creation process to submit a full application per the terms of the RFA.

vi. The full application is reviewed by a selection committee per the RFA requirements and GUC manual processes described herein. The partner is accepted if the full application meets the eligibility and selection criteria set forth in the RFA.

vii. A final review and acceptance of the program statement in the grant award agreement is completed alongside the selected partner before the grant is proposed to USAID for award.

2.2.3 The following considerations will guide how to choose between grant solicitation and award

mechanisms.

i. An APS /NOFO or BAA is most appropriate when the technical team seeks to identify new or under-utilized partners and solicit a wider range of solutions and innovations. Both of these processes can remain open for up to a 1-year period for new grant entrants and introduce opportunities to test out a new idea. It is usually a two-stage process with a competitive concept note stage to evaluate potential grantees, followed by co-design and a full application stage. It’s helpful as it can stay open all year and allow for new grant entrants and introduce opportunities to test out a new idea. A NOFO/RFA may be used to define a two stage (or more) application process that is not open all year and is more narrowly defined in terms of eligibility, objectives, and criteria.

ii. A one-stage NOFO in the form of an RFA is best to use when the technical team has a specific idea of what it seeks to accomplish, is targeted to a technical or geographic area, and within a specific time frame. It is useful to host a workshop or event ahead of the finalization of an RFA to co-create solutions with a group of potential partners.


iii. A potential partner, particularly non-traditional partners who are not familiar with donor programs and grants, may be reluctant to apply under an APS/NOFO or BAA. MSP may support the partner under a MOU or similar engagement agreement without using a grant to build their understanding of the grant solicitation process. Once the partner becomes eligible for award consideration, the partner will be invited under one of the two processes described above. If eligible, the partner will be considered for award under a JRE.

iv. These processes will be reviewed and adapted over time, informed through MSP’s CLA approach, to ensure the most efficient and effective competitive selection processes are used to engage the private sector.

2.2.4 The use of the APS/NOFO, BAA, or RFA mechanisms will take into account market systems development (MSD) best practices. The MSP technical team will consider:

• What is the exit strategy after funding ends?

• What is the appropriate level or degree of support needed based on the risk of the activity to the partner(s) and their willingness to adapt a new business model or technology solution?

• Would the private sector be able to fund this without Feed the Future MSP assistance (i.e., is the grant distorting a market)?

• How is MSP’s assistance contributing to—positively or negatively—the incentives and reward structures of the private sector’s engagement?

• Has enough due diligence been undertaken to ensure USAID rules and regulations can support the activity?

• What are the alternative options or actions the partner has within reach?

• Is the value of the partner contribution commensurate with the potential contribution to MSP’s objectives?

Responsibility Action

Solicitation Process

Engagement

Manager

Engagement Manager develops program statement and sends to MEL Manager for program review, COP or Senior PSE Advisor for technical review (and approval), Grants and

Subcontracts Manager for compliance review, and DCOP for final review and acceptance of quality compliance. DCOP forwards final program statement to Grants and Subcontracts

Manager for APS/NOFO/RFA preparation.

Grants &

Subcontracts

Manager

1. Develops NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA in collaboration with the COR and Buy-In Client

based upon the buy-in initiative. The following work instructions from the MSP

GUC Manual provide detailed guidance for this action.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 3: Designing a Request for Applications

❖ MSP Work Instruction 4: Designing an Annual Program Statement ❖ MSP Work Instruction 5: Types of Applicants and Procedures

❖ MSP Work Instruction 6: Exceptions to Competition of Grants ❖ MSP Form 1: MSP RFA Template attachment

❖ MSP Form 2: MSP APS / BAA Template attachment

1.1. The NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA must clearly indicate whether the funding

opportunity is open to all entities.

1.2. If eligibility is restricted, the NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA must state the type of

entities that are eligible and the rationale for why restriction of eligibility is

considered necessary.

1.3. The period of performance must not extend beyond the current MSP Activity

contract or buy-in initiative end date.


DCOP 2. Review draft NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA

2.1. Submit to COP for review and approval

2.2. Submit to COR and/or the Buy-In Client for review if USAID requires input

and/or consultation.

Grants & Subcontracts

Manager

3. Set up a Selection Committee for concept note or application review if the program requires multiple or consensual decision/review. Refer to MSP Work

Instruction 7: Setting Up Grant Selection Committees in the MSP GUC Manual for

additional guidance if necessary.

3.1 USAID personnel/Buy-In Client personnel will be prioritized to sit on the

committee, if applicable. In the case that non -DAI personnel participate in selection committees, the majority of the committee must be comprised of DAI

personnel with voting authority. At minimum this should be the Engagement Manager and MEL Manager.

Grants &

Subcontracts

Manager

4. Issue NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA through appropriate media channels (e.g. web site,

radio, print advertisement).

4.1. The project meets DAI’s competition policy for grants when an

announcement is published.

4.2 NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA must be available for receipt of applications or concept notes of a reasonable amount of time no less than 15 days. MSP will

implement a streamlined application process that seeks to engage partners through simplified technical presentations (either through PowerPoint or

Concept Notes) while maintaining a strong emphasis on cost reasonableness reviews for responsible award. MSP’s guiding principles and best practices

outlined in Section B of this Grants Manual will facilitate greater clarity and accompaniment of the MSP grants team at earlier stages of the grant

process, rationalizing why MSP believes a 15-day turnaround is a sufficient timeframe to conduct a competitive application process. A full application

will be finalized during the final co-design phase of onboarding selected grant applicants. DAI will provide longer response periods for sizeable activities or

more detailed application requirements to ensure competition to the

maximum extent practicable.

5. Set up a NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA folder. See MSP Work Instruction 11: Grantee

Documentation for additional guidance.

6. Unsolicited applications – ADS.303.3.5.5: Unsolicited applications are those

submitted to DAI by an applicant solely on their initiative, without prior formal or informal solicitation by the Activity. DAI may issue an award based on an unsolicited application, without the benefit of competition, when the application:

• Clearly demonstrates a unique, innovative, or proprietary program;

• Represents an appropriate use of funds to support or stimulate a

public purpose; and

• Fits with an existing programmatic objective.

Unsolicited applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance

with USAID regulations and, whenever possible, will be considered through a relevant APS. (When the terms of an unsolicited application fit within the scope

of a published and open APS, the application may be considered under that APS.) The unsolicited application is then considered to have been competed under

the APS and no justification for restricted eligibility is required.

This exception may not be used for non-competitive extensions to existing awards. A grantee’s request to extend an ongoing relationship is not an unsolicited application. To use this exception, DAI must first certify that it did not

solicit the application and that the application was submitted by the applicant solely on his/her own initiative. The memorandum of negotiation must address


how the following issues warrant acceptance of the unsolicited application without competition:

• In what way the application is unique, innovative, or proprietary

• How funding the application is an appropriate use of Activity funds to

support or stimulate a public purpose

• How the proposed activity fits within a program objective

Evaluation Process

Grants Staff 1. Receive and review applications or concept notes by documenting the information in TAMIS. For each concept note or application received, a separate form is created

in TAMIS.

1.1. Enter all contact information and grants details as outlined on the form for

each applicant.

1.2. Check applicants in SAM as indicated on the form. See Work Instruction 4.4:

Excluded Parties Search in the FOM for additional guidance.

1.3. Log in the applications using the date they are received.

1.4. Review the concept notes or applications and all supporting materials for completeness as listed in NOFO. See MSP Work Instruction 8: Reviewing

and Evaluating Applications in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant for

additional guidance.

1.5. Notify applicants of receipt and next steps (rejection, review, needs more

information) by creating the letter in TAMIS or offline.

2. Prepare Concept Note or Application Competition Records in TAMIS.

Grants and Subcontracts

Manager

3. Approve Concept Note or Application Competition Records in TAMIS.

Grants Staff 4. Ensure all Selection Committee members or individuals involved in making the decision to award a grant on a non-competitive basis have signed and dated the Confidentiality & Disclosure of Relationships form certifying that the individual has

no relationship that could affect their impartial and objective evaluation

4.1. If USAID and/or Buy-In Client personnel sit on the committee, they will be required to execute a Confidentiality & Disclosure of Relationships Form and

NDA document for the grant file.

❖ Form 14 - Confidentiality & Disclosure of Relationships Form- Grants

5. Forward instructions, NOFO/APS/BAA/RFA and concept notes or applications to

the Selection Committee members for evaluation. If necessary, schedule a meeting to discuss the process for the how the selection committee will be conducted and

what each individual’s responsibilities are.

5.1. Notify selection committee members of review deadlines and what

documents are needed from them.

Selection

committee

6. Review and score concept notes or applications and recommend potential grantees.

6.1. Create an evaluation score card offline and rate the concept note or

application according to the pre-determined criteria mentioned in the

NOFO. Do not introduce new factors. Identify weaknesses or areas that need

further clarification, development or improvement by the applicant.

❖ Form 17 – Individual Evaluation Score Card 6.2 Based on the instructions provided to the selection committee in step 5,

conduct selection committee meeting to discuss and agree on scoring and evaluation. Due to COVID-19 and the nature of a centrally managed, buy-

in mechanism contract, selection committee meetings will likely occur via virtual conferences. If and when feasible, in-person committee meetings will

be convened.

https://apps1.daiglobal.net/projects/WorldWide/FieldOperationsManual.nsf/80c0228390be7d9f852578830008f874/0415c4e72f52507a85257d49006a223d?OpenDocument

https://apps1.daiglobal.net/projects/WorldWide/FieldOperationsManual.nsf/80c0228390be7d9f852578830008f874/0415c4e72f52507a85257d49006a223d?OpenDocument


6.2. Print and attach a score card to the Grant File

Grants Staff 7. Summarize Selection Committee ratings and recommendations in TAMIS for each

concept note or application.

❖ Form 18 – Combined Evaluation Score Card (Consensus) Engagement

Manager and

Grant Staff

8. Notify applicant of decision using the approved letter templates under this Grants

Manual and made available in TAMIS.

There are three options as described below.

8.1. Accept the concept note or application and inform applicant they will move forward for further review and the applicant will be contacted by a staff

member. Proceed to step 9.

8.2. Reject the concept note or application and provide explanation to the

applicant as to why the application was rejected.

8.2.1. Terminate the application by changing the status of the concept

note or application in TAMIS to “rejected”.

8.2.2. Generate termination letter using the approved template, made

available in TAMIS.

8.3. If co-creation is next step, invite the applicant to the co-creation process and

provide additional instructions for co-creation. If a full application requires additional follow-up, invite the applicant to clarify their application either

through written responses or via an interview / Q&A process. Upon

receipt, the application will be reviewed again.

8.3.1. Generate letter requesting more information from applicant.

8.3.2. Return to step 4 upon receipt of requested information.

8.4 For co-creation using a concept note and full application process (two-stage

process), the applicants whose concept notes were scored high enough to pass to the co-creation phase will be invited to co-create with MSP, USAID,

or with multiple organizations or stakeholders based on the concept papers submitted. If the co-creation is successful, applicants will then be invited to

submit full applications through a Request for Full Application process for selection to receive grant funding to implement the activity. Once a selection

has been made, proceed to 8.5.1

8.5 For processes that do not utilize a concept note stage (1-stage), the selected grantee from the initial APS/BAA/RFA process will be directly engaged in co-

creation and adaptation of their grant application, evaluating whether the interventions and funds requested are consistent and support the buy-in

scope and/or MSP’s market systems and PSE approaches (i.e.. activities are

facilitative, non-distorting, and sustainable).

8.5.1 Schedule meetings between the applicant and the Engagement

Manager and/or Grant staff lead and advise applicant on what types of information and documentation is necessary to move forward

with requesting grant award from USAID. Create an applicant on-boarding plan to assist in transforming the application into a USAID

ready grant request.

8.5.2. Work with the applicant to finalize their grant award package with all required due diligence and technical scope and budget

justification as laid in the below sections.

Grants Staff &

Engagement

Manager

9. Conduct cost analysis of applicants’ budgets. If necessary, staff shall negotiate the

budget to ensure that costs are realistic and reasonable. See MSP Work Instruction 8: Reviewing and Evaluating Applications in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant for

additional guidance.


9.1. Review each cost element for reasonableness and allowability. The extent of the cost analysis will vary among grant types and is determined on the basis

of the nature of the program, past experience with the applicant, and the

amount and type of costs involved.

9.2. Determine the applicants' understanding of the financial aspects of the

proposed program and the applicants' ability to perform proposed activities

with the funds requested (e.g., are enough funds budgeted?).

9.3. Evaluate the means by which the applicants’ plans will accomplish the

program objectives with reasonable economy and efficiency.

9.4. Determine if any costs are restricted or unallowable per DAI’s agreement with USAID (e.g. vehicles, computer equipment, and fertilizer) as these items

may require additional approvals.

Grants Staff 10. Conduct pre-award risk assessment determination of each applicant to ensure they

have the capacity to implement a grant. See MSP Work Instruction 8: Review and Evaluating Applications for additional guidance.

10.1. Conduct a review of the following aspects of the organization. The level of scrutiny and review required shall be proportional to the complexity of the

grant program contemplated and the total amount of the grant. 10.2 Recent audited financial statements (note that per ADS 303.3.9, DAI may ask

for three years of audited financial statements when appropriate) Projected budget; Cash flow; Organization chart; Applicable policies and procedures

(e.g., accounting, purchasing, property management, personnel), if appropriate.

10.3 In cases that require further information, the project may also verify financial responsibility and institutional capability by inspections, letters from other

donors, and/or on-site visits. 10.4 Document all findings in the Memorandum of Negotiation. The written

determination of the applicant ’s responsibility should confirm that the

applicant:

• Has adequate financial resources, or the ability to obtain such

resources, as required during the performance of the award;

• Has the ability to meet the award conditions, taking into

consideration all existing prospective recipient commitments, nongovernmental and governmental;

• Has a satisfactory record of performance. Generally, relevant unsatisfactory performance in the past is enough to justify a finding of non-responsibility, unless there is clear evidence of subsequent

satisfactory performance, or the applicant has taken adequate corrective measures to assure that they will be able to perform

satisfactorily;

• Has a satisfactory record of business integrity; and

• Is otherwise qualified to receive an award under applicable laws and

regulations.

10.5 If the Grant team evaluates the financial capabilities of an applicant and

determines that the organization is limited or deficient, the staff shall classify them as a high-risk organization. The project shall either deny the application

or ensure that specific measures are built into the grant award that allows for close monitoring of the organization until the deficiencies are corrected.

10.6 Attach all Questionnaires to the Financial Management Checklist in TAMIS. 10.7 Determine if capacity development requirements (technical, financial,

operational, marketing, etc.) are feasible and include as an obligation to comply in the grant.

Deputy Chief of

Party

11.1 Complete environmental review of grant if necessary according to approved MSP

environmental compliance policies and buy-in activity. Consult with USAID

Activity Manager and COR if necessary.

11.2 Complete environmental concurrence and documentation in TAMIS, if necessary.


111.3. Create the Environmental Review form made available in TAMIS and complete all

fields, if necessary

11.4. Forward to Chief of Party for review. Obtain necessary USAID approvals.

11.5. Update TAMIS upon receipt of concurrence from the Chief of Party

11.6 Ensure that any environmental mitigation efforts or reporting requirements are included in the grant agreement.

Grants Staff and

Engagement

Manager

12. Grants and Technical staff will work in close consultation to ensure the final

program statement of the grant agreement captures fully the technical and operational elements identified in the co-creation process. Co-creation is designed

to help support the incorporation of key activity implementation considerations and requirements into the full application to enhance opportunities for increased local

ownership and sustainability of MSP’s programming. Co-creation ensures final applicants have fine-tuned program statement objectives, including corresponding

budget elements to support implementation.

12.1. Revise goals, objectives, and results if needed.

12.2. Review and adjust the budget if any issues arose during the cost analysis.

12.3. Adjust the proposed plans if there are any mitigating environmental issues

and describe how they will be addressed.

12.4 Create a Branding Strategy and Marking Plan (see Section D.3 of MSP

Contract). Grants under contract, when authorized in accordance with ADS 302, “USAID Direct Contracting” must be branded and marked like grants.

The policy directives and required procedures for branding and marking of

assistance awards in ADS Section 320.3.3 and 22 CFR 226.91 apply. The Contractor is responsible for including branding and marking requirements

for these grants in its Branding Implementation Plan and Marking Plan, as part of its overall responsibility for managing grants under its contract. See MSP

Work Instruction 9: Creating a Branding and Marking Plan for additional guidance.

13. Grants Staff Prepare Memorandum of Negotiation in TAMIS

13.1. Document the cost analysis, pre-award determinations, and negotiation process and provide any other relevant details on points agreed upon in a

Memorandum of Negotiation. See MSP Work Instruction 10: Writing a

Memorandum of Negotiation for additional guidance.

Grants &

Subcontracts

Manager

14. Approve Memorandum of Negotiation in TAMIS.


Manager, DCOP, COP, DAI US

Contracts

Manager

15. Prepare request for grant approval package to USAID and forward to DCOP for

review.

15.1 Prepare COR Action Memo for grants below $100,000

15.2 Prepare CO Request Letter for grants above $100,000 or if in-kind to local

government of any threshold.

15.3 Either approval package shall include: Program Description, Budget, Milestone

Schedule (if applicable), and Award Selection documentation or JRE

15.4 DCOP sends approval package to COP for concurrence / approval

15.5 COP approves Action Memo and sends to COR for approval

15.6 COP concurs with request letter and sends to DAI US Contracts Manager

for review and onward submission to CO for approval.


Award Process

Grants staff 1. Convert the applicant’s application to a grant upon receipt of written approval from

USAID

1.1. Update TAMIS by changing the status of the grant and also converting the

application to a grant by assigning a grant number.

1.2. Generate Grant Agreement documents in TAMIS upon receipt of written

concurrence (or TAMIS concurrence if allowable) from USAID.

1.3. Generate rejection letter if grant is not approved by USAID.

Grants and

Subcontracts

Manager

2. Review and approve Grant Agreement documents, ensuring that the correct grant

format is used and the required standard provisions and certifications are attached.

Chief of Party and

DAI/BETHESDA Office of

Contracts and Grants

(depending on

threshold)

3. COP signs all Grant Agreements (DAI Contracts Manager approves grants above

$100,000, but does not sign).

Grants staff 4. Forward the signed Grant Agreement to the applicant for signature and update

applicant status in TAMIS.

3. Recordkeeping The required records that must be maintained in the course of executing grants award agreements are provided in the Project Record Map. The detailed requirements and checklist tools are provided in MSP Work Instruction 0: Grants File Checklist.


D. PROCEDURE 2: GRANT

ADMINISTRATION, MANAGEMENT, AND

REPORTING

1. Purpose and Scope 1.1 This procedure implements the policies related to administering and monitoring a grant

under the MSP GUC program.

1.2 This procedure describes the end to end process of administering and managing a grant from award to close.

1.3 The overall purpose of this procedure is to ensure compliance in administering and managing awards and the successful implementation of the grant.

1.4 Grant and reporting encompass all dealings between the Activity and the grant recipient from the time the award is made until the end of the support. The specific nature and extent of the management shall vary from award to award; it can range from reviewing and analyzing performance reports or performing site visits to more technically developed involvement for high-risk recipients.

2. Process Responsibility Action

Grants Staff & Engagement Manager

1. Arrange an orientation meeting with the winning applicant upon approval by the authority stated in the PSOA and USAID.

1.1. Invite all project and USAID staff involved in the process to attend, such as the Engagement Manager/Technical Staff, Grants & Subcontracts Manager,

DCOP, COP, USAID COR and USAID Activity Manager. 1.2. Clarify the roles and responsibilities of the project staff who will administer

the grant and interface with the applicant. Briefly define the normal relationship between the Engagement Manager/Technical Staff and the

Grants staff, as well as the relationship with between the USAID Activity Manager and COR with MSP.

1.3. Review all documents and terms of the agreement with the applicant and answer any questions.

1.4. Review all financial issues: request for funds, earned income, procurement, reimbursement, reporting, and records. See the following work

instructions in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant for additional guidance.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 17: Interest Earned on Grant Advances

❖ MSP Work Instruction 18: Use and Disposition of Project Income

1.5. Review all administrative issues related to implementing the grant:

reporting, publications, grievances, termination, property, etc. 1.6. Review disposition of property under the grant (if any).

1.7. Review the Branding and Marking Plan and its application to the grant, as determined in the application stage.


1.7.1. USAID reserves the right to request preproduction review of USAID-funded public communications and program materials for

compliance with USAID and Feed the Future graphic standards and the approved Marking Plan.

1.8. If applicable, review Trafficking in Persons (TIP) compliance requirements.

Sub-awardees for agreements over $500,000 must create a TIP compliance plan, certify it annually, and must receive materials and orientation

appropriate for their level of capacity

See the following sections in the FOM for additional guidance.

❖ Policy 3: Governing Policy on Project Compliance ❖ Policy 8.0a Governing Policy on Anti-Human Trafficking

❖ Form 3.15: Subcontractor TIP Compliance Plan Template

❖ Form 3.16: Anti-Human Trafficking Poster

2. Have the applicant sign and return the grant agreement. 2.1. Change the status of the grant in TAMIS to active.

3. Open a grantee file for hard copies and potential audits of the grant by setting up

binders (if applicable), files in SharePoint, etc. During implementation, all staff shall follow the established filing system. See the following work instruction in the MSP

GUC Manual concomitant for additional guidance.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 11: Grantee Documentation

4. Update the grant record tab in TAMIS by scanning the grant agreement cover sheet with signatures and paste it into the space provided. No need to scan the

whole document as it is in TAMIS. 4.1. Create a Grant Profile in TAMIS

5. Update TAMIS by recording the milestones and/or outputs for the particular grant which are in the grant agreement documents. Each output or milestone shall be

entered individually. See the following work instruction in the MSP GUC Manual

concomitant for additional guidance.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 12: Publications and Media

6. Ensure the grant activity aligns with the MSP MEL plan, as well as any MEL reporting required by the buy-in. This review will be undertaken in conjunction

with the Engagement Manager/Technical Staff, MEL Manager, COP, USAID Activity Manager, and COR. Enter this information into appropriate the MSP MEL

management data system. 6.1. Ensure the criteria and indicators are captured in the grant.

Grants Staff 7. Forward a copy of the grant budget to the Project Manager and Project Associate

for payment control.

8. Review all planned disbursements and requisitions in the grant agreement and budget and enter them in TAMIS. Follow the instructions below according to the

grant. If the grant is to a United States based Non-Governmental Organization

(NGO), please review additional Guidance in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 15: Cash Disbursements for Grants

8.1. If the grant is a Simplified Grant without a grant advance, no entry is

required as it is cost reimbursable; proceed to step 10. If the grant is a Simplified Grant with a grant advance, then see the table below.

8.2 If the grant is to a PIO disbursements still function as one of the following: Simplified, In Kind, Fixed Amount Award (FAA) or Standard. Refer to the

terms of the grant agreement if unsure. 8.3 All DAI procurement policies and procedures are followed for In Kind

grants. 8.5. All grant payments will be managed through Oracle.

Fixed Amount Award In Kind Standard & Simplified

Grant


Schedule disbursements in TAMIS based upon the

timeline for all milestones/outputs as

agreed upon in the award and as detailed on the

“Activities and Outputs” tab during step 5.

Enter the requisition(s) for goods or services in TAMIS.

Any special procurement plans/instructions not

included in the requisition shall be sent to the

DCOP.

Enter any approved advance amount as a

scheduled disbursement in TAMIS.

Prepare the advance for the grantee following the

guidance in the FOM, Financial Management

Procedure 7.5 Field Advance Management.

Grants &

Subcontracts Manager/Grants

Staff/MEL Specialist/Engagement

Manager

9. Monitor the grantee according to the approved activities in the grant agreement

and their alignment with the overarching MSP MEL Plan and buy-in requirements. 9.1. Follow up on outputs and grant progress through site visits, telephone

calls, email, etc. 9.2. Ensure payments were issued and requisitions filled by grantee.

9.3. Confirm receipt of funds and/or goods and services by grantee. 9.4. Document all monitoring activities by creating a Comment Form in TAMIS.

Attach any reports, emails, etc. to the Comment Form to detail all relevant actions/communications.

9.5. If the grantee requests an amendment, follow the work instruction in the

MSP GUC Manual concomitant.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 13: Amendments to Grant Awards

9.6. If the grantee has a grievance, which is not readily remedied through direct

discussion (i.e., work stoppage, complaint of treatment or process) follow

the work instruction outlined in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 14: Grievances and Early Termination of

Grants

9.7. If the grantee is underperforming, unable or unwilling to fulfill grant requirements, or violating the terms of the agreement, follow the work

instruction outlined in the MSP GUC Manual concomitant.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 14: Grievances and Early Termination of

Grants

Grants Staff/ Engagement Manager

10. Receive and review grantee request for payment or request for reimbursement. 10.1. Check all receipts and documentation submitted by the grantee against the

budget and implementation plan for simplified or standard grants. Obtain milestone approval from the COP for fixed amount award grants. Share

milestone with USAID/buy-in client if applicable. Refer to the DAI Remote Activity Verification Guidance document for how to securely ensure

verification of grantee performance. 10.2. Follow up with the grantee on any questions or comments concerning

receipts, milestones, or documentation. 10.3. Prepare a Request for Payment.

10.3.1. Download, or collect, all supporting documents attached to the TAMIS grant record and save them in a single file in SharePoint. It’s possible these

documents are already saved in the SharePoint subfolder corresponding to this grant.

10.3.2. Open a document combining tool (such as Adobe Pro or NitroPro) and use the feature for “combining” documents.

10.3.3. Organize the backup documents in the following preferred order:

✓ Signed grant award document and any amendments ✓ All grant approvals

✓ Competition and negotiation documents

Note: if this is not the first payment request against the award, all backup documentation must be included in the electronic backup documents, even

if they were included in the first payment. This is not true of the hardcopy.


10.3.4. Combine these documents (regardless of file type – Word, PDF, excel) into a single PDF using the “combine” function of the software and name it

“Backup Documentation Grant Payment Request #X”. 10.3.5. Open the scanned document and check the quality of the electronic

document. If any pages do not meet the following requirements it must be rescanned:

a. Pages are all easily readable. b. Pages are not cut off, missing, or blackened fully or partially.

c. Original paper copy is the same as the scanned image. 10.3.6. Provide this single PDF file to the Grants & Subcontracts Manager.

10.4. Submit electronic payment request for approval, as per the PSOA. 10.5. Collect all hardcopy documents that support the grant request for

payment. These are documents that were created, received, or signed in hardcopy format. It is not necessary to create hardcopy documents from

documents that were created, received, or signed electronically. This means that the hardcopy set of backup documents may not contain all of

the same documents that are contained in the electronic set. Organize these in the same order as step #11.3.3 above.

Note: For any subsequent payments against a multiple payment award, the hardcopy set only must include an easy-to-find reference to the first

payment Voucher Number, or payment Request Number, which must be listed on the Payment Request Form. There is no need to include

hardcopies of all the original documentation again. 10.6. Provide hardcopy document set to the Accountant. There is no need to

keep a duplicate copy in hardcopy of these documents in the Grants Office. Once these originals are submitted to Finance, electronic copies found in

TAMIS are the only records that must be kept by the Grants Team. 10.7. When settling a grantee’s advance, follow the instructions in the financial

management procedure outlined in the FOM.

❖ Procedure 7.5 Field Advance Management

10.8. If issuing an additional advance, return to step 9 above and continue the procedure from that point.

10.9. If this is the final grantee payment, do not pay. Refer to the procedure in

the MSP GUC Manual concomitant, as outlined in the following:

❖ Section E : Procedure 4 Closing Out Grants.

Grants Staff/ Engagement Manager

11. Resume the on-going monitoring of the grant as outlined in Step 10. 11.1. Pay particular attention to end dates and manage budgets closely at the

advanced stages of the grants.

Grants & Subcontracts Manager

and Engagement Manager

12. Regularly update the COP or DCOP on the grantees’ status, noting any particular successes or delays in grant implementation, problems with the payments/requests

for reimbursements, or cost share contributions.

Grants Staff or

Engagement Manager

13. Notify the grantee that 45 days remain prior to the end date of the agreement.

13.1. Inform the grantee that all activities shall cease on the end date and no reimbursements shall be paid for costs incurred after this date.

13.2. Instruct the grantee to begin preparing the final report and that it shall be due on the end date of the agreement.

13.3. Inform the grantee that they have 30 days after the end date of the agreement to prepare and submit their final financial report. Remind the

grantee that no costs incurred during preparation of this report shall be

reimbursed as it is after the end date of the agreement.

❖ Form 5: Grantee Final Report

14. Monitor the grant closely and stay in contact with the grantee during the final weeks of implementation.

15. Receive and review the Final Report from the grantee. 15.1. Log the report into TAMIS.


15.2. Review the Final Report against the approved milestones and outputs. 15.3. Contact the grantee regarding any discrepancies or missing

documentation. 15.4. If applicable, share final report with USAID/buy-in client once approved by

DAI.

16. Issue the final grant amendment, can be in the form of an amendment or can be contained in the closeout letter which contains the final grant value.

17. Conduct a file audit using the Grants Checklist to confirm that the documentation found in TAMIS is complete. If any documents are missing, find them and scan and

attach them. 18. Change the status of the grant in TAMIS to “completed.” Continue with the close

out process following Procedure 3. Closing Out Grants.



E. PROCEDURE 3: CLOSING OUT GRANTS

1. Purpose and Scope

1.1 This procedure implements the policies related to closing out a grant agreement stated in Section B: Governing Policy on Management and Implementation of Grants.

1.2 This procedure describes the end to end process of closing a grant from the completion of all activities to auditing and closing the grant file.

1.3 The overall purpose is to ensure compliance in documenting the completion of grant awards.

2. Process Responsibility Action

Grants Staff/ Engagement

Manager

1. Begin drafting final evaluation report on the grant; highlighting particular successes and/or lessons learned. Work with the Engagement Manager/Technical Staff and

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Manager to compile all information.

❖ Refer to Form 6: Grantee Evaluation Report Template

2. Create a Close-out Form in TAMIS. 2.1. Begin auditing the Master Grant File while simultaneously proceeding through

steps 4 to 11 of this procedure. Refer to the below work instruction in the

MSP GUC Manual concomitant for further guidance.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 11: Grantee Documentation

3. Contact the DAI Project Associate or Project Manager to confirm that all requisitions are completed and closed.

Grants Staff

4. Contact all vendors and service providers.

4.1. Confirm that all final goods and services were delivered. 4.2. Collect any outstanding invoices and submit for payment.

4.3. Review and update the inventory list for In-Kind disbursed grants in TAMIS.

Refer to the below procedure in the FOM for further guidance.

❖ Procedure 9.6: Inventory Management

6. Receive and review the Final Financial Report from the grantee.

❖ MSP Form 4: Grantee Financial Report

6.1. Log the report into TAMIS. 6.2. Review the Final Financial Report against the approved budget and the

remaining funds. Refer to the below work instructions in the MSP GUC Manual

concomitant for additional guidance.

❖ MSP Work Instruction 17: Interest Earned on Grant Advances

❖ MSP Work Instruction 18: Use and Disposition of Project Income

6.3. Review all of the receipts and back-up documentation. 6.4. Contact the grantee regarding any discrepancies or missing documentation.

6.5. Enter any final disbursements and/or reconciliation of advances in TAMIS.

7. Forward the Final Financial Report and documentation to the Accountant.


Grants and Subcontracts

Manager

8. Review the Final Financial Report and all documentation. 8.1. Audit all advances and disbursements to grantee in the accounting system.

8.2. Prepare the final disbursement for the grantee if required. 8.3. Ensure that all advances that have been billed to the client are reconciled.

9. Notify Grant Staff when all documentation is in order and ready for final payment

Engagement

Manager/ Grants Staff

10. Finalize the Grant Evaluation Report with final inputs from Engagement

Manager/Technical Staff and MEL Manager.

11. Finalize the audit of the Master Grant File.

12. Notify the Grants & Subcontracts Manager that the grant is completed and forward

the Grant Evaluation Report and the Final Financial Report for review.

Chief of Party 13. Review and approve the reports. 13.1. Follow up with Grants Staff, Engagement Manager/Technical Staff, or MEL

Manager on any revisions or clarifications.


Manager

14. Perform a final audit of the Master Grant File. 14.1. Notify the Grants Staff that everything is in order and the grant can be closed.

14.2. Notify the Grants Staff of any missing or incomplete documentation that is required to close the grant. Set a deadline for completion of the file.

Grants Staff 15. Notify the DAI Project Associate and Project Manager that documentation is now

complete and the final disbursement can be processed accordingly.

Grants &

Subcontracts Manager/DCOP/

COP

16. Send request to the DCOP to close the grant and forward with any supporting

documentation including the Grant Evaluation Report. If client/buy-in client approval is not required, the COP is the final approver.

16.1. Include the final amount expended on the grant and attach any final reports and/or evaluations.

16.2. COP can share if applicable the final Grant Evaluation Report to USAID/buy-in client.

COP 17. Approve the request to close the grant.

Grants Staff 18. Prepare close out letter for grantee upon receipt of USAID/buy-in client approval (if applicable) to close the grant.

❖ Form 7 : Grant Close-Out and Disposition Letter

Grants &

Subcontracts Manager / DCOP

19. Review and approve Grant Close-Out Letter.

COP 20. Sign the Grant Close-Out Letter.

Grants Staff 21. De-obligate any unspent funds and update TAMIS.

22. Forward the Grant Close-Out Letter to the grantee.

23. Update the Grantee Profile in TAMIS with a summary of successes and lessons learned.

23.1. Circulate Grantee Profile to internal technical staff for application to subsequent grants or technical work.

24. Set the grantee status to “closed” in TAMIS.



Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20523

Tel: (202) 712-0000

Fax: (202) 216-3524

www.usaid.gov

WWW.FEEDTHEFUTURE.GOV

Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships

Documents

Transcript of Feed the Future Market Systems and Partnerships