Feed the Future Innovation Labs

Feed the Future Innovation Labs - Statement of Interest (Amendment 1)

Statement of Interest (SOI)
Feed the Future Innovation Labs
Amendment 1
Department of State
Opportunity number: DFOP0017826
Concept Note Application deadline: April 9, 2026
1

---

Contents
A. Basic Information ......................................................................................... 3
B. Eligibility ...................................................................................................... 7
C. Program Description ..................................................................................... 9
D. Application Contents and Format ............................................................... 13
E. Submission Requirements and Deadlines .................................................. 17
F. Application Review Information ................................................................ 23
G. Award Notices ............................................................................................ 25
H. Post-Award Requirements and Administration .......................................... 25
2

---

U.S Department of State
Office of Global Food Security
Call for Statements of Interest
A. Basic Information
1. Background and Overview
The Office of Global Food Security of the U.S. Department of State announces an
open competition for organizations to submit a statement of interest (SOI) to serve
as a Management Entity to design, host, and lead a Feed the Future Innovation Lab
(FtF Innovation Lab).
U.S. investments in agricultural research through the FtF Innovation Labs benefit
the world’s poorest regions while also providing major benefits in the United
States. America First investments in agriculture and food security are intended to
directly benefit American safety, strength, and prosperity, especially in our own
hemisphere. Simultaneously, the FtF Innovation Labs are structured to advance
progress toward poverty reduction and hunger by developing innovative solutions
that address the root causes of poverty and hunger. The United States values the
ability to drive and shape agricultural research priorities, in part through its
investments in programs such as the FtF Innovation Labs. Investments in U.S.
university-led agricultural research, including the FtF Innovation Labs, have had
an outsized positive impact on the American agricultural sector, foreign policy
priorities, and economic prosperity. Over the past 40 years, our $1.2 billion
investment in U.S. university-led international agricultural research led to the
equivalent of over $8.4 billion in economic returns -- $8 of impact for every $1
dollar invested.1
The FtF Innovation Labs will advance solutions to reduce global hunger, poverty,
and malnutrition, both at home and abroad, including in response to shocks and
stresses to food and nutrition security. Agricultural research underpins food supply
stability, food security, and food affordability both in the United States and in
developing countries.2 This call for Statements of Interest recognizes the
1 Dalton, Timothy J., and Keith Fuglie. "Costs, benefits, and welfare implications of USAID investment in
agricultural research through US universities." Journal of agricultural and applied economics 54, no. 3 (2022): 461-
479.
2 Pardey, Philip G.; Chan-Kang, Connie; Stads, Gert-Jan; Chai, Yuan; Alston, Julian M.; Greyling, Jan; Muñoz, Hernán (2025)
Food will be more affordable — if we double funds for agriculture research now. Nature, 648 (8093). doi:10.1038/d41586-025-
03970-0
3

---

importance of U.S. scientific leadership in protecting the global food supply
through American excellence in agricultural research and development (R&D).
FtF Innovation Labs leverage the advanced capacities of U.S. land-grant
institutions to address challenges facing agriculture globally. By supporting
healthy innovation pipeline development, the FtF Innovation Lab investments
buffer against rising global food prices by increasing food availability, reducing
consumer prices, and lowering production costs for farmers in the U.S. and around
the world.
New America First FtF Innovation Lab investments are aligned with the policy
priorities of the U.S. Department of State, by:
Making America Safer: Protecting Americans by preventing agricultural threats
(including pest and disease outbreaks), especially in our hemisphere, from
reaching U.S. shores or U.S. production systems, enhancing the safety and
reliability of imported food, and by minimizing instability that can result from
chronic food insecurity.
• Technologies developed with U.S. support enhance global agricultural
productivity, reduce the impact of weather events, and combat pests and
diseases--keeping food and agriculture safe at home and abroad.
• Research enhances food quality, safety, and availability. FtF Innovation
Lab research can improve the safety and reliability of imported foods
(coffee, cocoa, spices, fruits) for U.S. consumers, lowering costs and
increasing choices for Americans.
• Global agricultural research contributes to U.S. national security by
reducing migration pressures that stem from economic and food
insecurity. By bolstering food security in regions prone to scarcity, FtF
Innovation Labs can mitigate underlying drivers of conflict, like
economic grievances and resource competition.
Making America Stronger: Strengthening bilateral relationships, building trust
and cooperation, highlighting the quality and skills of U.S. universities,
promoting resiliency in benefitting countries, and countering adversaries and
malign actors, especially in the Western hemisphere.
• FtF Innovation Labs draw on expertise at the top U.S. universities to
tackle some of the world’s greatest challenges in agriculture and food
security, strengthening U.S. research capacity and demonstrating the
quality and skills of US Land Grant institutions globally.
• Long-term research partnerships build institutional trust and cooperation,
4

---

which are critical during global crises (e.g. pandemics, weather-related
shocks).
• FtF Innovation lab research can build the capacity of research
institutions, agricultural sectors, and food systems around the world,
better equipping other governments with the tools they need to feed their
own populations.
Making America More Prosperous: Preventing costly agricultural threats,
enhancing global production, reducing the need for humanitarian food
assistance, and promoting American innovations globally.
• Procurement of supplies and inputs from U.S. companies enhances U.S.
agriculture and facilitates market entry for American innovations in
emerging markets.
• Private sector interests benefit through an expanded customer base and a
strong pipeline of innovation that meets farmers demands.
• Research on improved farming methods, input use efficiency, and storage
loss reduction advancements can save US farmers money.
• Improving agricultural productivity and reducing the frequency of shocks
in areas prone to food insecurity can lessen the need for frequent and
costly humanitarian food assistance.
The U.S. Department of State recognizes the importance of research in enabling
the global food system to increase agricultural yields and productivity, build
resilience to shocks, meet nutritional needs, reduce food loss and waste, improve
diets, improve food safety, and holistically manage risk for people, food, and
agricultural systems.
The submission of the SOI is the first step of a two-step process. Applicants are
invited to submit a concise (maximum of 8-page) Statement of Interest (SOI) that
clearly communicates project ideas, objectives and approach. This is not a full
proposal, and this phase will not result in a federal assistance award. Rather, the
SOI process allows applicants to submit project ideas for evaluation prior to the
development of a full application.
Upon a merit review of eligible SOIs, a subset of selected applicants will be invited
to submit a full proposal. Full proposals will go through a merit review before
final funding decision(s) are made. Invitation to submit a full proposal is not a
commitment to funding. Issuance of this SOI opportunity does not constitute an
award commitment on the part of the Government, nor does it commit the
Government to pay for any costs incurred in preparation or submission of
5

---

comments/suggestions or an application. Applications are submitted at the risk of
the applicant. All preparation and submission costs are at the applicant’s expense.
Funding Opportunity Title Feed the Future Innovation Lab
Funding Opportunity DFOP0017826
Number
Announcement Type Initial
Deadline for Applications April 9, 2026 11:59pm EST
Assistance Listing Number 19.017 Environmental and Scientific
Partnerships and Programs
Length of performance Up to 60 months
period
Number of awards 5-7 awards (approximate)
anticipated
Award amounts Individual awards may range from a minimum
of $20 million to a maximum of $40 million
(approximately) over the life of the award.
Total available funding $64 million total in FY 2026 (with outyear
funding subject to the availability of funds)
Type of Funding Development Assistance funds under the
Foreign Assistance Act
Anticipated project start date No later than September 30, 2026
Funding Instrument Type: Grant or Cooperative Agreement
Award Performance Period: Proposed projects should be completed in 60 months
or less.
The Department of State will entertain applications for continuation grants funded
under these awards beyond the initial budget period on a non-competitive basis
subject to availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the program, and a
determination that continued funding would be in the best interest of the U.S.
Department of State.
This notice is subject to availability of funding.
2. Executive Summary
America First investments in agricultural research through the FtF Innovation Labs
6

---

benefit the world’s poorest regions while also providing major benefits to the
United States. The Department of State invites eligible applicants to advance
global food security in alignment with U.S. policy through targeted research that
meets one or both of the following core objectives:
1) Advances agricultural science and research to increase productivity,
mitigate threats to production systems, and support food systems to reduce
hunger and malnutrition through enhanced supply of nutritious and safe
foods; and/or
2) Increases demand for individual and household consumption of
nutritious, safe foods as part of healthy diets, and improves market pathways
and opportunities for government and private sector actors to promote
consumption of nutritious and safe foods.
The Management Entity of each respective FtF Innovation Lab is expected to help
implement and communicate impact pathways from research to development
outcomes via partnerships with other USG programs, national partners, private
companies, community-based organizations, such as faith-based organizations, and
other donors and their programs. Programs must ensure U.S. investments directly
benefit American safety, strength, and prosperity. Proposals should clearly address
how the research activities will support both global food security and U.S. national
security and economic interests, reduce the need for repeated humanitarian
assistance, expand market access for U.S. companies, and protect the U.S
agriculture industry.
B. Eligibility
1. Eligible Applicants
Eligibility is restricted. The eligibility requirements below apply only to the
applicant of each concept note/proposal.
Applications must only be submitted by eligible U.S. colleges and universities as
defined under Section 296(d) of Title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act, as
amended (22 U.S.C. 2220a(d)): “... those colleges or universities in each State,
territory, or possession of the United States, or the District of Columbia, now
receiving, or which must hereafter receive, benefits under the Act of July 2, 1862
(known as the First Morrill Act) or the Act of August 30, 1890 (known as the
Second Morrill Act), which are commonly known as ‘land-grant’ universities;
institutions now designated or which must hereafter be designated as sea-grant
colleges under the Act of October 5, 1966 (known as the National Sea Grant
7

---

College and Program Act), which are commonly known as sea-grant colleges;
Native American land-grant colleges as authorized under the Equity in Educational
Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note); and other United States
colleges and universities which— (1) have demonstrable capacity in teaching,
research, and extension (including outreach) activities in the agricultural sciences;
and (2) can contribute effectively to the attainment of the objectives of this title.”
The Title XII university-led Feed the Future Innovation Lab programs involve
multiple partners, principal of which are U.S. universities, working in collaboration
with scientists in developing country universities, national and international
research centers, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
to jointly pursue scientific investigations to overcome critical agricultural
constraints facing today’s global food systems.
All types of U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners (i.e.
sub-recipients or contractors at various tiers) of the applicant, provided that they
are not excluded from U.S. Government acquisition and assistance awards (this
may be verified through SAM.gov).
In preparing the application, it is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that no
individuals or organizations proposed for participation in the program are excluded
by the U.S. Government. After award, it is the Recipient’s responsibility to ensure
that no transactions are conducted with excluded parties.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
Cost sharing or matching is not required. While applicants may propose cost share
or matching, cost-sharing/matching will not be evaluated as part of the merit
review process. Opportunities for cost sharing and matching may be discussed
during negotiation, if applicable. Per 2 CFR §200.306, items that are proposed for
cost share must be allowable per 2 CFR §200, Subpart E—Costs Principles.
3. Other Eligibility Requirements
All organizations must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) issued via SAM.gov
as well as a valid and active registration in SAM.gov. Please see Section E.3 for
more information.
Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award
Management (SAM.gov) (www.sam.gov) and/or has a current debt to the U.S.
government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the
OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR
8

---

Part 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR Part1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment
and Suspension.” Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties
List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award. All
applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in
SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their
application.
Applicants may submit up to two (2) applications as the Management Entity (ME).
Note: Coordination with other eligible applicants and use of a consortia approach
is acceptable. In addition to applying as a Management Entity, an organization may
partner as a sub awardee under other eligible applications.
C. Program Description
1. Objectives and Areas of Inquiry
The Global Food Security Act (GFSA) recognizes the critical role that research
plays in achieving U.S. Global Food Security and nutrition goals, and mandates
that the U.S. government “harness science, technology, and innovation, including
the research and extension activities supported by relevant federal departments and
agencies, including state partners, and Feed the Future Innovation Labs”. In
particular, the GFSA defines FtF Innovation Labs as “research partnerships led by
United States universities that advance solutions to reduce global hunger, poverty,
and malnutrition including in response to shocks and stresses to food and nutrition
security”. This activity also reflects support of work with universities on global
research as provided in the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) section 296(a).
Section 103A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), as amended, requires
that agricultural research carried out under the Act …shall (1) take account of the
special needs of small farmers in the determination of research priorities, (2)
include research on the interrelationships among technology, institutions, and
economic, social, environmental, and cultural factors affecting small-farm
agriculture, and (3) make extensive use of field testing to adapt basic research to
local conditions. Research programs proposed under this SOI should not reflect a
quest for fundamental knowledge and improvement of scientific theories, nor a
straightforward delivery of goods and services. Rather, this is a unique enterprise
requiring rigor, discipline, awareness of local context, and building relationships
with global actors to develop and apply innovations that impact global food
security. This research is expected to generate knowledge and new or improved
9

---

technologies and practices, while also building linkages to partners and activities
that can transfer information and innovation into the hands of stakeholders, where
impacts may be achieved. The agricultural research investments supported under
this SOI should be considered “impact pathways,” which map out connections
between research outputs and development actors and outcomes that directly relate
to one or more of the objectives below.
The overarching objectives and areas of inquiry of the program will benefit the
American people and the people in the countries in which we provide assistance:
• Objective 1: Advance agricultural science and research to increase
productivity, mitigate threats to production systems, and support food
systems to reduce hunger and malnutrition through enhanced supply of
nutritious and safe foods.
• Area of Inquiry 1.1 Agricultural Systems and Sustainable
Intensification of Production: This area of inquiry might include
measures to sustainably improve soil health and fertility; and soil and
water use management; improving input use efficiency; expanding
improved mechanization and sustainable intensification approaches;
reducing pre- and post-harvest losses; improving the nutritional value
and contribution of crops; breeding activities leading to resilient crop
varieties along with tools, technologies and/or methods to enhance
resilience to crop threats; exploring optimal crop and farming system
design for production, income and efficiency; and preventing,
managing, and controlling threats from weather-related shocks such as
droughts, floods, pests and pathogens.
• Area of Inquiry 1.2 Livestock and Animal Health: This area of
inquiry might include breeding activities for improved livestock
health and productivity, innovative feeding strategies, productivity
gains and improved production techniques in aquaculture, enhanced
approaches and technologies to animal health, identification of threats
and control challenges of pests and pathogens, enhanced and context-
specific vaccine delivery methodologies.
• Objective 2: Increase demand and improve market pathways to
increase uptake of nutritious and safe foods for individuals, households,
governments, and the private sector.
10

---

• Area of Inquiry 2.1 Nutrition, Food Systems and Food Safety:
This area of inquiry may include improving breeding activities for:
improving the delivery of nutritious products through supply chains;
reducing food loss and waste across the value chain; food processing
and preservation techniques; off- and on-farm value addition;
enhancing the nutritional value and benefit of and from crops and
food products; improving food safety; identifying alternative uses for
unusable and by-products; and improving financing and incentives for
off-farm activities and businesses.
The new FtF Innovation Labs will continue to leverage the comparative advantages
of the U.S. university community and its public and private-sector partners and
will conduct research and development within the Areas of Inquiry. Additionally,
the description of the areas of inquiry are illustrative and may not include topics
that reasonably fit within the area of inquiry. Applicants may suggest topics that fit
within the area of inquiry that are not listed.
2. Key Issues and Approaches across Objectives
FtF Innovation Lab research and activities should incorporate key themes to ensure
successful outcomes for both food security and agriculture. These themes should
be considered in program design. These include but are not limited to:
• Enhanced availability and uptake of improved technologies and
practices: FtF Innovation Labs may focus on deeper analysis of scaling
pathways, or they may prioritize research leading to innovation. Innovation
research should consider various drivers of and constraints to the scalability
of new and improved technologies and practices, including necessary
capacity development, sustained financing, and demand for new
technologies.
• Private sector engagement: Partnerships with U.S., international, regional,
and local businesses should be considered to transform research into
marketable technologies with viable business models. This may include the
development of public/private sector partnerships. Private sector
partnerships should be encouraged as components of scaling innovation
delivery and enhancing market development, as relevant.
• Leveraging cutting-edge American technology and innovation: Use of a
range of innovations and advances, including Artificial Intelligence and
digital solutions, can improve the efficiency of agricultural inputs, responses
to productivity threats, market access, countering of malign actors, and
access to data and information for farmers’ timely responses and improved
11

---

decision-making.
• Mitigation of production risks and vulnerabilities that contribute to
humanitarian food security crises: Innovations and approaches to enhance
productivity in geographies prone to humanitarian food security crises can
reduce the cost of long-term reliance on foreign assistance by focusing on
technologies, practices, and approaches to enhance productivity in disaster-
prone contexts.
• Coordination and collaboration with the global agricultural research
community, including global research institutions and local universities, to
minimize duplication of efforts, enhance leveraging of capacity and
resources for maximum impact, achieving buy-in from practitioners,
achieving scale, and crowding in resources.
• Embedding a robust monitoring, evaluation, and learning framework
into activities to assess the impacts and effectiveness of programs, inform
future U.S. policy and programming decisions, and a clear plan to share
knowledge and findings.
3. Priority Regions
Geographic target areas should reflect activities and partnerships in low- to middle-
income countries3 and showcase a strategic approach that unites key elements for
impact. For example, geographic targets might be selected for a strategic approach
by crop, commodity or farming system, innovation delivery approach or partner
network to maximize impact. The concept note should indicate which countries
will be targeted for activities and elaborate on the prioritization of those locations.
The following considerations should inform geographic targeting:
• Alignment with foreign policy goals of the United States, including those
articulated in the National Security Strategy, and the Department of State’s
Agency Strategic Plan 2026-2030.
• Opportunities to promote trade, cooperation, and investment in
countries of importance in international strategic competition and to expand
market access for American companies abroad.
• Ability to reduce requirements for foreign aid in countries with large,
frequent, and/or protracted caseloads of emergency food assistance.
3 For the purposes of this solicitation, country income classifications are defined by the World Bank using the
GNI per capita (Atlas method) -- see https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-
world-bank-country-and-lending-groups. Therefore, “low- to middle-income countries refers to: low-income,
lower-middle income, and upper-middle income countries.
12

---

4. Substantial Involvement
Areas of substantial involvement include but are not limited to the following:
• Joint Programmatic Decisions: The Department of State and the recipient
collaborate on key programmatic decisions. This can include (but is not
limited to) determining when certain phases of the project can start,
approving staffing selections of key roles, final method of delivery or
implementation, selections following assessments, etc.
• Technical Assistance and Guidance: The Department of State provides
ongoing technical assistance and guidance integral to the project's execution,
which if not followed, would undermine the goals and objectives of the
award or otherwise make the award unsuccessful.
D. Application Contents and Format
1. Phase 1 – Statement of Interest (SOI)
Please follow all instructions below carefully. SOIs that do not meet the
requirements of this announcement or fail to comply with the submission
requirements will be deemed technically ineligible and will not move forward to
the Merit Panel Review (MRP). Each SOI may be responsive to either a single
or multiple objectives and areas of inquiry. Contents of SOI must include the
following required information:
a. Table Listing of Critical Details:
I. Proposed Project Title
II. Name of the Organization
III. Objective(s) to which the SOI is responding
IV. Area(s) of Inquiry to which the SOI is responding
V. Target Benefiting Country or Countries
VI. Total Federal Share Requested
VII. Total Cost Share (as applicable)
VIII. Project Length
b. Issue/Challenge/Opportunity: Briefly describe the problem(s), issue(s),
challenge(s), or opportunity(ies) the applicant is seeking to address.
c. Proposed Solution/Activities: Describe the approach and core activities to
address the issue/challenge/opportunity. This should provide the Applicant’s
overall vision and approach for implementing a global research program
13

---

that includes a portfolio of high-quality, innovative research activities
designed to achieve long-term development impact among host country
beneficiaries. The FtF Innovation Labs are expected not only to generate
improved knowledge, technologies, and practices, but to make outputs
available to partners who will take them to scale. Applicants must briefly
describe how they will strengthen linkages and partnerships among key
partners for technology design, handoff and scaling.
d. Anticipated Outcomes and Results: Identify the specific outcomes and
results the approach/activities seeks to achieve and define “success.”
Identify Outcomes and results that can be achieved during the program’s
lifetime as well as any potential “quick wins” that may be delivered in the
earlier phases of the work. The nature, scope, and sustainability of
outcomes and results will be critical to assessing the costs and benefits –
and determining whether the SOI will proceed to the next stage of the merit
review process.
e. List of Partner Roles and Responsibilities (if applicable): Include a list
of proposed applicant partners (private, public, NGO, etc.) to be considered
as subrecipients (see 2 CFR 200.331 and 200.332). Identify organization
name, point of contact, point of contact information (phone and email),
federal share to be award by the pass-through entity, cost-share (if
applicable), and a summary of proposed roles and responsibilities. Include a
summary of the management structure and the broad approach to
coordination. Note: This should be a brief, preliminary characterization of
roles and responsibilities that may evolve significantly during the
subsequent phase. Partner letters of commitment are not requested as part
of the concept note submission.
f. Summary Budget Annex (will not count against the 8 total page count):
All proposed costs must be allowable per 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E—Cost
Principles. Please include in the Summary Budget header the applicant
organization’s name, program title, and duration of the program. The
Summary Budget must include the total proposed Federal Share in U.S.
dollars listed according to the cost categories in the Summary Budget Table
Example below. If Cost Share is proposed, this should be included in the
Budget Summary as shown below. Please provide the total proposed
Contractual costs for sub-recipient organizations, and if specific
organizations have been identified at this phase, provide the total for each
proposed sub-recipient organization as a separate Contractual sub-category
item. An optional Summary Budget template is available in the “Suggested
Templates and Guidance” section under “Budget Guidance for Applicants -
New Award Budget Sample” at: https://www.state.gov/resources-for-
14

---

programs-and-grants/. The Summary Budget Annex should not exceed one
page.
Summary Budget Table Example:
Cost Category Federal Share Cost Share Total Project
(if applicable) Budget
A. Personnel
B. Fringe
Benefits
C. Travel
D. Equipment
E. Supplies
F. Contractual
(including
subawards)
G.
Construction
H. Other Direct
Costs
I. Total Direct
Costs
J. Total
Indirect Costs
K. Total
(Sum I-J)
g. Relevant Past Performance Annex (will not count against the 8 total page
count): information regarding its recent history of performance for all its
cost-reimbursement contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements involving
similar or related programs, not to exceed five projects as follows:
I. Name of the awarding organization;
II. Award number; Activity title;
III. A brief description of the activity;
IV. Period of performance;
V. Award amount;
VI. Reports and findings from any audits performed in the last three
years;
VII. Name of at least two (2) updated professional contacts who most
directly observed the work at the organization for which the
service was performed with complete current contact information.
15

---

If the applicant encountered problems on any of the referenced Awards,
they may provide a short explanation and the corrective action taken. The
applicant should not provide general information on its performance.
h. SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) (will not count against the
8 total page count).
i. Statement on Eligibility Annex (as applicable) (will not count against
the 8 total page count): Applicants that are not “land-grant universities,”
“sea-grant colleges,” or “Native American land-grant colleges” under the
statutory definition of Title XII “universities” must submit with their
application an additional attachment with a statement relating to their
eligibility under the statutory definition of Title XII institutions as
described in Section B.1. above. This statement must contain references
to other parts of the Technical and/or Cost Application and to non-
proprietary and publicly available references, and must not exceed two
(2) pages in length.
The SOI is meant to convey initial ideas regarding a proposed project. As the
negotiation and/or consultative program design (if applicable) process continues,
the ideas and approaches may evolve as the applicant and the Department of
State determine the most appropriate way to work together to address the
problems, challenges, issues, and opportunities.
Required Format of SOI Submission: All documents must be written in English,
and all costs must be presented in U.S. dollars. If an original document within
the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided
(please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires
that English is the official language of all award documents). If any document is
provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is
the controlling version. All pages must be numbered. Additional requirements
are as follows:
• All documents must be formatted to 8 ½ x 11 paper
• All documents must be single-spaced, written in a minimum of 12-point
Times New Roman font with 1-inch margins.
• The exception is captions and footnotes which may be 10-point Times New
Roman font. Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be
reformatted to fit within 1 page width.
• Submissions must be no more than 8 pages not inclusive of annexes and
required documents (SF-424).
• The SOI and all accompanying annex documents should be combined into a
single document for submission, in a searchable and editable PDF or Word
16

---

format, with the exception of the required form SF-424. The Application for
Federal Assistance (SF-424) must be submitted separately, with any
applicable attachments added within the form where indicated.
E. Submission Requirements and Deadlines
1. Address to Request Application Package
Application forms and other materials required to apply are available at grants.gov
or MyGrants under the announcement title “Feed the Future Innovation Lab,”
funding opportunity number “DFOP0017826.”
Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will not be accepted. Reasonable
accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with
disabilities or for security reasons.
2. Department of State Contacts
If you have any questions about the grant application process, please contact:
FTFIL-SOI@state.gov.
Any questions regarding this SOI must be emailed to FTFIL-SOI@state.gov by
February 26, 2026, at 4:00pm Washington, D.C. time. Questions and Answers or
FAQ will be posted on grants.gov, by March 10, 2026, to answer questions from all
potential applicants.
3. Unique entity identifier and System for Award Management (SAM.gov)
Required Registrations
All organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must
have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and an active registration in SAM.gov. A
UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal
Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards. An
applicant must maintain an active registration while it has a proposal under review
by the Department and must continue to keep the registration active for the entire
duration of the period of performance of any Federal award that results from this
NOFO.
The 2 CFR 200 requires subrecipients to obtain a UEI. Please note the UEI for
subrecipients is not required at the time of application but will be required before
17

---

an award is processed and/or directed to a subrecipient.
Note: The process of obtaining or renewing a SAM.gov registration may take
anywhere from 4-8 weeks. Please begin your registration as early as possible.
• Organizations based in the United States or that pay employees within the
United States will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and a UEI prior to registering in SAM.gov.
• Organizations based outside of the United States and that do not pay
employees within the United States do not need an EIN from the IRS but do
need a UEI prior to registering in SAM.gov.
• Organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply
for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to
have a NATO Commercial and Government Entity (NCAGE) code to apply
for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant
organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from
their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket
(“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov
using the following language: “I do not intend to seek financial assistance
from the Department of Defense. I do not wish to obtain an NCAGE code. I
understand that I will need to submit my registration after this incident is
resolved in order to have my registration activated.”
o Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO NOT plan
to do business with the DoD should proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI
and complete the SAM.gov registration process. SAM.gov registration
must be renewed annually.
o Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO plan to do
business with the DoD in addition to Department of State should apply
for an NCAGE code by following the instructions on the NSPA NATO
website linked below:
NCAGE Homepage:
https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/sc/CageList.aspx
NCAGE Code Request Tool (NCRT):
NCAGE Code Request Tool (nato.int)
An exemption from the UEI and sam.gov registration requirements may be
permitted on a case-by-case basis. See 2 CFR 25.110 for a full list of
18

---

exemptions. Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov
requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least two
weeks prior to the deadline in the NOFO providing a justification of their
request. Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted
Grants Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review.
4. Submission Dates and Times
SOI applications are due no later than April 9, 2026, on grants.gov or
MyGrants under the announcement title “Feed the Future Innovation Labs,”
funding opportunity number “DFOP0017826.”
5. Funding Restrictions
a. The Department of State will not consider applications that reflect any type
of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated
terrorist organization. Please refer to the link for Foreign Terrorist
Organizations: https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/.
b. The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from
supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible
information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.
Per 22 USC §2378d(a) (2017), “No assistance shall be furnished under this
chapter [FOREIGN ASSISTANCE] or the Arms Export Control Act [22
USC 2751 et seq.] to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if
the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed
a gross violation of human rights.”
c. Funding Restrictions for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency
(UNRWA): None of the funds awarded resulting from this Notice of Funding
Opportunity may be made available for subawards, direct financial support,
or otherwise used to provide any payment or transfer to UNRWA.
d. Prohibition on Funding Activities that Encourage Mass-Migration Caravans
towards the United States Southwest Border: None of the funds awarded
under this grant may be made available to encourage, mobilize, publicize, or
manage mass-migration caravans towards the United States southwest
border. Funds may not be made available for legal counseling on the United
States asylum process; and/or for referrals to legal or representation in the
United States. Funds may only be used for cash cards for use in the country
in which they are provided or to facilitate assisted voluntary returns and
other purposes that do not encourage, mobilize, publicize, or manage mass
19

---

migration caravans towards the United States southwest border. The
provision of humanitarian assistance is permitted.
e. Certification Regarding Compliance with applicable Federal anti-
discrimination laws: If the place of performance or delivery of any award
made under this Statement of Interest will be within the United States,
applicants are advised that they will be required to certify the following at
the time of award:
o Its compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-
discrimination laws is material to the government’s payment decisions
for purposes of section 3729(b)(4) of title 31, United States Code and;
o It does not operate any programs promoting Diversity, Equity, and
Inclusion that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.
A program promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion means a
program whose purpose is to promote preferences based on race, color
religion, sex, or national origins, such as in training or hiring.
f. Certification Regarding Compliance with 20 U.S.C. 1011f and any other
applicable foreign funding disclosure requirements. Applicants are advised
that IHEs must certify the following at the time of award, and that this
certification requirement must be included in any subaward agreements to
IHEs:
o Its compliance in all respects with section 1011f of title 20, United
States Code, and any other applicable foreign funding disclosure
requirements is material for purposes of section 3729 of title 31,
United States Code, and for receipt of appropriate Federal grant funds.
g. Certification of Trafficking in Persons Compliance and Compliance Plan:
Applicants are advised that they will be required to certify the following at
the time of award for awards where the estimated value of services to be
performed outside the United States exceeds $500,000:
o To the best of the Recipient’s knowledge, neither the Recipient, nor
any subrecipient, contractor, or subcontractor of the Recipient or any
agent of the recipient or of such a subrecipient, contractor, or
subcontractor, is engaged in any of the activities described in 2 CFR
175.105(a);
o The recipient has implemented a Trafficking in Persons compliance
plan to prevent activities described in 2 CFR 175(a) and is compliant
with this plan; and the compliance plan must follow the minimum
requirements described in 2 CFR 175(b)(5).
20

---

o That the Recipient has and will implement procedures to prevent
activities described in 2 CFR 175.105(a) and to monitor, detect, and
terminate any subrecipient, contractor, subcontractor, or employee of
the recipient engaging in these activities.
Recipients do not need to submit a copy of the plan. However, they must
provide it to the Grants Officer upon request, and as appropriate, must post
the useful and relevant contents of the plan or related materials on its
website and at the workplace. Recipients must re-certify on an annual basis
for the entire award period of performance.
h. Prohibition on Unmanned Aircraft Systems Manufactured or Assembled by
American Security Drone Act-Covered Foreign Entities
(a) Definitions.
American Security Drone Act-covered foreign entity means an entity
included on a list developed and maintained by the Federal
Acquisition Security Council (FASC) and published in the System for Award
Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov.
FASC-prohibited unmanned aircraft system means an unmanned aircraft
system manufactured or assembled by an American Security Drone Act-
covered foreign entity.
Unmanned aircraft means an aircraft that is operated without the possibility
of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.
Unmanned aircraft system means an unmanned aircraft and associated
elements (including communication links and the components that control
the unmanned aircraft) that are required for the operator to operate safely
and efficiently in the national airspace system.
(b) Prohibition. Recipients of funding under this Statement of Interest
(including subawards and subcontracts issued by the recipient) will be
prohibited from:
(1) delivering any FASC-prohibited unmanned aircraft system, which
includes unmanned aircraft (i.e., drones) and associated elements;
21

---

(2) On or after December 22, 2025, operating a FASC-
prohibited unmanned aircraft system in the performance of the award;
and
(3) On or after December 22, 2025, using Federal funds for
the purchase or operation of a FASC-prohibited unmanned aircraft
system.
(c) Exemptions, exceptions, and waivers. The prohibitions described above
will not apply if the agency determines that an exemption, exception, or
waiver applies and the award indicates that such a determination has been
made. [See sections 1823 through 1825 and 1832 of Public Law 118-31 (41
U.S.C. 3901 note prec.) for statutory requirements pertaining to exemptions,
exceptions, and waivers.].
6. Other Submission Requirements
The Department of State bears no responsibility for disqualification that results
from applicants not being registered for submission before cycle due dates, for
technical system errors, or other errors in the application process.
The Department of State encourages organizations to submit applications during
normal business hours (Monday – Friday, 9:00AM - 5:00PM Eastern Standard
Time [EST]). If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted
the appropriate helpdesk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g., if you have not
received a response within 48 hours of contacting the helpdesk), you may contact
the GFS point of contact listed above. The point of contact may assist in contacting
the appropriate helpdesk.
Applicants using MyGrants for the first time will need their “New Organization
Registration.” To register with MyGrants, navigate to
https://MyGrants.servicenowservices.com and click “Create an Account” under
“New User?” On the pop-up select “Create a MyGrants Applicant/Grantee
Account” and complete all required fields. Once completed, an email will be sent
to verify the account creation followed by an Okta Account set-up which will
require the use of a smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA). If an
applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of account
creation, please contact the helpdesk. For assistance with MyGrants accounts and
technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone
at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the
Self Service online portal that can be accessed from ILMS Self Service Portal.
22

---

Customer support is available 24/7.
F. Application Review Information
1. Review Criteria
Each submission will be evaluated and rated based on the evaluation criteria
outlined below.
Quality of Program Idea – 50 points: The SOI is responsive to program
objectives and utilizes an approach that ensures scientific quality. The application
must highlight how research outputs may support global, regional and national
efforts in food security. The application must address how the program plans to
meet the policy priorities of the Department of State. The program idea must be
clearly communicated and feasible within the timeframe and consider
sustainability and potential impact. SOI’s that promote measurable, impactful
approaches to program objectives are highly encouraged. The proposed timeline is
reasonable. The FtF Innovation Lab will build on lessons learned within the
broader research community and research topic area for increased sustainability of
program impacts.
Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives – 30 points: The SOI should
clearly articulate proposed program activities with a timeline and expected results
towards achieving program objectives and goal(s). This evaluation component will
also consider the proposed staffing footprint, geographic locations and
network/relationship maturity to ensure the ability to achieve objectives.
Organizational Capacity and Record on Previous Grants – 20 points: The SOI
should demonstrate the organization’s expertise and previous experience in
administering programs. If a local partner is identified SOI should briefly describe
the partner’s role and experience.
2. Review and Selection Process
A. Phase 1- SOI Review and Selection:
All technically eligible SOIs will be reviewed against the criteria listed above by a
Merit Review Panel (MRP). There may be multiple MRPs to review SOIs based on
program area, country, or region, as appropriate. SOIs will only be evaluated once.
For a fair review, all panelists will review the first page of the SOI up to the page
limit and no further (not including Annex of past performance.)
23

---

The MRP may provide conditions and/or recommendations on SOIs to enhance the
proposed program, which must be addressed by the organization in the full
proposal application and/or collaborative design process, as applicable. To ensure
effective use of funding, conditions and recommendations may include requests to
increase, decrease, clarify, and/or justify costs and program activities.
The Department of State reserves the right to make a final determination regarding
all funding matters, pending funding availability.
All Merit Review Panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflict of
interest agreements. The Department of State will not share statements of interest
with other applicants.
B. Phase 2 –Request for Full Proposals
Following the MPR review, approved SOI applicants will be directed to an
announcement available via MyGrants to submit a full proposal application based
on their approved concept. A full application typically includes but is not limited to
the following:
Updated SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) (if applicable)
•
SF424A (Budget Information for Non-Construction programs)
•
SF424B (Assurances for Non-Construction programs) (if applicable)
•
Coversheet/Executive Summary
•
Proposal Narrative
•
Budget Narrative
•
Detailed Budget
•
Program Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
•
Key Personnel
•
Timeline
•
Attachments, (if applicable)
•
Detailed instructions regarding the full application submission process will be
provided to those applicants that move to phase 2.
3. Risk Review
Under the merit review as required by 2 CFR 200.206, prior to making a
Federal Award the Department will review and consider the following risk
factors:
a. Financial stability
b. Management systems and standards
24

---

c. History of performance
d. Audit reports and findings
e. Ability to effectively implement requirements
f. If there are any program specific risk factors that will be considered,
describe them here.
Prior to making an award with a total federal share greater than the simplified
acquisition threshold, the federal awarding agency is required to review and
consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity
and performance system accessible through SAM (formerly FAPIIS) (see 41
U.S.C. 2313). An applicant can review and comment on any information in the
responsibility/qualification records available in SAM.gov. Before making
decisions in the risk review required by 2 CFR 200.206, the Department of
State will consider any comments by the applicant, along with information
available in the responsibility/qualification records in SAM.gov.
G. Award Notices
The grant award or cooperative agreement will be written, signed, awarded, and
administered by the Grants Officer (GO). The award agreement is the
authorizing document, and it will be provided to the recipient for review and
signature by email. The recipient may only start incurring program expenses
beginning on the start date shown on the grant award document signed by the
GO.
If an application is selected for funding, the Department of State has no
obligation to provide any additional future funding. Renewal of an award to
increase funding or extend the period of performance is at the discretion of the
Department of State.
Issuance of this SOI does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the
U.S. Government, nor does it commit the U.S. Government to pay for costs
incurred in the preparation and submission of proposals. Further, the U.S.
Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals received.
H. Post-Award Requirements and Administration
1. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
Before submitting an application, applicants should review all the terms and
conditions and required certifications which will apply to this award, to ensure
that they will be able to comply.
25

---

In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget’s guidance located at
2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal laws, and relevant Executive guidance,
the Department of State will review and consider applications for funding, as
applicable to specific programs, pursuant to this notice of funding opportunity
in accordance with the following: NOTE:
• Guidance for Grants and Agreements in Title 2 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (2 CFR), as updated in the Federal Register’s 89 FR 30046 on
April 22, 2024, particularly on:
o Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering results
based on the program objectives through an impartial process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR part 200.205),
o Promoting the freedom of speech and religious liberty in alignment
with Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty (E.O. 13798) and
Improving Free Inquiry, Transparency, and Accountability at Colleges
and Universities (E.O. 13864) (§§ 200.300, 200.303, 200.339, and
200.341),
o Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to maximize
use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States (2
CFR part 200.322), and
o Terminating agreements pursuant to the U.S. Department of State
Standard Terms and Conditions, including, to the greatest extent
authorized by law, if an award no longer effectuates the program goals
or agency priorities (2 CFR part 200.340). For the avoidance of doubt,
the Department has sole discretion over the determination that an
award no longer effectuates program goals or agency priorities, and
this provision permits awards to be terminated at the Department’s
convenience, including when it determines that the award no longer
advances the national interest.
• 2 CFR 25 - UNIVERSAL IDENTIFIER AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD
MANAGEMENT
• 2 CFR 170 - REPORTING SUBAWARD AND EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION INFORMATION
• 2 CFR 175 - AWARD TERM FOR TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
• 2 CFR 182 - GOVERNMENTWIDE REQUIREMENTS FOR DRUG-
FREE WORKPLACE (FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE)
• 2 CFR 183 - NEVER CONTRACT WITH THE ENEMY
• 2 CFR Chapter VI – DEPARTMENT OF STATE REQUIREMENTS2 CFR
Chapter VI – DEPARTMENT OF STATE REQUIREMENTS
26

---

• U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE STANDARD TERMS AND
CONDITIONS
2. Reporting
Recipients will be required to submit financial reports and program
performance reports. The award document will specify what reports are
required and how often these reports must be submitted.
Foreign Assistance Data Review: As required by Congress, the Department of
State must make progress in its efforts to improve tracking and reporting of
foreign assistance data through the Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR).
The FADR requires tracking of foreign assistance activity data from budgeting,
planning, and allocation through obligation and disbursement. Successful
applicants will be required to report and draw down federal funding based on
the appropriate FADR Data Elements, indicated within their award
documentation. In cases of more than one FADR Data Element, typically
program or sector and/or regions or country, the successful applicant will be
required to maintain separate accounting records.
Applicants should be aware of the post award reporting requirements reflected
in 2 CFR 200 Appendix XII—Award Term and Condition for Recipient
Integrity and Performance Matters.
3. Branding and Marking
The Department of State, its programs, and U.S. Government funding and
assistance should be easily identifiable to the Department's global audiences.
Recipients of federal assistance awards must follow the branding guidance
published at Guidance for Contracts and Grants - U.S. Department of State
Brand System. Branding policy exceptions are outlined in the U.S. Department
of State Foreign Affairs Manual 10 FAM 416, Policy Exceptions. For more
information, visit: https://brand.america.gov/
.
27

---

Feed the Future Innovation Labs - Q&A

Note: The following addresses questions submitted in response to the Statement of Interest
(SOI) for Feed the Future Innovation Labs (Opportunity number: DFOP0017826). An
Amended SOI addressing key questions will be posted to grants.gov (changes are
highlighted in yellow in the amended SOI).
Feed the Future (FtF) Innovation Labs Statement of Interest - Questions and Answers
Q&A Shortcuts:
Eligibility
Budget/Funding
Partnerships and Management Structure
Programmatic
Key Personnel
Monitoring and Evaluation
Statement of Interest Application/Submission Guidelines
Geographic Focus/Location
Award Mechanism and Substantial Involvement
Other
Eligibility
Question 1: Land- and sea-grant universities are referenced in several places in this SOI
(eligibility and elsewhere). Are land-grant universities required to be the lead organization
for a Feed the Future Innovation Lab?
Answer 1: Eligibility is restricted. The eligibility requirements below apply only to the
principal Applicant. Eligibility is restricted to Title XII institutions as set forth below:
This program is authorized under Title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended. Applications must only be submitted by eligible U.S. colleges and universities
as defined under 22 USC 2220a(d): “...those colleges or universities in each State,
territory, or possession of the United States, or the District of Columbia, now receiving,
or which must hereafter receive, benefits under the Act of July 2, 1862 (known as the
First Morrill Act) or the Act of August 30, 1890 (known as the Second Morrill Act),
which are commonly known as ‘land-grant’ universities; institutions now designated or
which must hereafter be designated as sea-grant colleges under the Act of October 5,
1966 (known as the National Sea Grant College and Program Act), which are commonly
known as sea-grant colleges; Native American land-grant colleges as authorized under
the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note); and other
United States colleges and universities which— (1) have demonstrable capacity in
teaching, research, and extension (including outreach) activities in the agricultural
sciences; and (2) can contribute effectively to the attainment of the objectives of this
title.”
The Title XII university-led FTF IL programs involve multiple partners, principal of
1

---

which are U.S. universities, working in collaboration with scientists in developing
country universities, national and international research centers, the private sector, and
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to jointly pursue scientific investigations to
overcome critical agricultural constraints facing today’s global food systems. All types of
U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners (i.e. sub-recipients or
contractors at various tiers), provided that they are not excluded from U.S. Government
acquisition and assistance awards (this may be verified through SAM.gov). In preparing
the application, it is the Applicant’s responsibility to ensure that no individuals or
organizations proposed for participation in the program are excluded by the U.S.
Government. After award, and it is the Recipient’s responsibility to ensure that no
transactions are conducted with excluded parties.
Question 2: Other eligibility criteria are listed as “(1) have demonstrable capacity in
teaching, research, and extension (including outreach) activities in the agricultural
sciences”. Would a policy school which has capacity in global agricultural research and
innovation fit?
Answer 2: The SOI has been modified to include an additional attachment in Section
D.1.i. Applicants that are not “land-grant universities,” “sea-grant colleges,” or “Native
American land-grant colleges” under the statutory definition of Title XII “universities”
must submit with their application an additional attachment with a statement relating to
their eligibility under the statutory definition of Title XII institutions. This statement must
contain references to other parts of the Technical and/or Cost Application and to non-
proprietary and publicly available references, and must not exceed two pages in length.
The Statement on Eligibility will not count against the 8 total page count for the SOI.
Question 3: Can you please clarify the text that says that eligibility includes "other United
States colleges and universities which— (1) have demonstrable capacity in teaching,
research, and extension (including outreach) activities in the agricultural sciences; and (2)
can contribute effectively to the attainment of the objectives of this title"? Specifically,
what would be required for a researcher at a non land-grant institution to demonstrate
that their university meets this criteria?
Answer 3: See answer 1 above.
Question 4: Under eligible institutions, besides land grant institutions, it indicates that
other United States colleges and universities that can apply must "1) have demonstrable
capacity in teaching, research and extension (including outreach) activities in agricultural
sciences; 2) can contribute effectively to the attainment of the objectives of this title". Does
this statement indicate that private universities that do not have formal extension and
outreach activities in the agricultural sciences are not eligible to apply?
Answer 4: See answer 1 above.
Question 5: A land-grant university which is eligible under the Title XII requirement, may
also have research, extension and experimental stations or centers with their own
2

---

governing structure, DUNS and UEI numbers. Are they eligible to apply?
Answer 5: U.S. Colleges and Universities that meet the Title XII designation requirement
are eligible to apply as a Management Entity and submit two applications. Individual
centers, labs and extension facilities that are part of a College or University system are
included in the number of submissions for the overall College or University, not treated
separately (regardless of having distinct DUNS or UEI numbers). All types of U.S. and
non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners (i.e. sub-recipients or contractors at
various tiers) of the applicant, provided that they are not excluded from U.S. Government
acquisition and assistance awards (this may be verified through SAM.gov).
Budget / Funding
Question 6: Is there a budget template or guideline we have to follow in Phase 1?
Answer 6: A Summary Budget should be provided as an Annex. The following Summary
Budget format information is included in an Amended SOI. All proposed costs must be
allowable per 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E—Costs Principles. Please include in the
Summary Budget header the applicant organization’s name, program title, and duration
of the program. The Summary Budget must include total proposed Federal Share in U.S.
dollars listed according to the cost categories detailed in the Summary Budget Table
Example below. If Cost Share is proposed, this should be included in the Budget
Summary as shown below. Please provide the total proposed Contractual costs for sub-
recipient organizations, and if specific organizations have been identified at this phase,
provide the total for each proposed sub-recipient organization as a separate Contractual
sub-category item. An optional Summary Budget template is available in the “Suggested
Templates and Guidance” section under “Budget Guidance for Applicants - New Award
Budget Sample” at: https://www.state.gov/resources-for-programs-and-grants/. A detailed
line item budget with cost-schedule is not a requirement for this SOI phase and will be
discussed further for applications selected to advance to the Request for Full Proposals
(RFP) phase. The Summary Budget Annex should not exceed one page. The SOI and all
accompanying annex documents should be combined into a single document for
submission, in a searchable and editable PDF or Word format, with the exception of the
required form SF-424.
Summary Budget Table Example:
Cost Category Federal Share Cost Share Total Project Budget
(if applicable)
A. Personnel
B. Fringe
Benefits
C. Travel
D. Equipment
E. Supplies
3

---

F. Contractual
(including
subawards)
G. Construction
H. Other Direct
Costs
I. Total Direct
Costs
J. Total
Indirect Costs
K. Total
(Sum I-J)
Question 7: Is there any requirement to set aside some portion of the budget for
competitive awards for research projects to be designed and developed in collaboration
with the State Department after the Management Entity award is selected?
Answer 7: There is not a requirement to set aside some portion of the budget for
competitive sub-awards for research projects that would be developed in collaboration
with the Department State after an award is made to the successful applicant. However,
applications must clearly describe how they will meet the goals and objectives outlined in
the SOI and research portfolio. See 2 CFR 200.318 - General procurement standards. See
also 2 CFR 200.319 - Competition.
Question 8: Page 13 includes the “Total Federal Share Requested” and “Total Cost Share
(as applicable)” items as required contents. For the Statement of Interest phase, does only
the total overall amount for each need to be included, or should a simple/summary budget
be provided (with the detailed budget being provided if selected to submit a full proposal)?
Answer 8: The required form SF-424 requests the total overall amount for “Total Federal
Share Requested” and “Total Cost Share (as applicable)” items as part of the SOI
application. All forms can be found in PDF editable format on Grants.gov at the
following link: https://www.grants.gov/forms/forms-repository/sf-424-family. A
Summary Budget should also be provided as an Annex. See the Amended SOI and the
response to Answer 6 above for details about the Summary Budget format. A detailed
budget will not be requested until the full proposal phase.
Question 9: The NOFO instructions require inclusion of the “Total Federal Share
Requested” and federal shares for partners, but do not specify whether a detailed budget
narrative or cost breakdown is required at the SOI stage. Beyond the SF-424, is DOS
expecting any budget justification, cost realism discussion, or summary budget table in
Phase 1? If so, what level of detail is recommended?
Answer 9: Statement of Interest applications must include the SF-424 and a Summary
Budget. See the Amended SOI and Answer 6 above for Summary Budget format details.
4

---

If selected for advancement to submit a full proposal, a detailed budget and justification
will be required with the full proposal.
Question 10: Aside from the SF-424, are there any budget requirements or guidelines for
the SOI?
Answer 10: Please refer Answer 6 above for details on budget requirements.
Question 11: Is an estimated detailed budget needed or recommended for the SOI
submission?
Answer 11: Statement of Interest applications must include the SF-424 and a Summary
Budget. See Answer 6 above for Summary Budget format details. If selected for
advancement to submit a full proposal, a detailed budget and justification will be required
with the full proposal.
Question 12: How much budget detail is expected for the SOI?
Answer 12: Statement of Interest applications must include the SF-424 and a Summary
Budget. See Answer 6 above for Summary Budget format details.
Question 13: In the Application Contents and Format, 1.a.VI. Total Federal Share
Requested, are applicants asked to list only the total amount being requested, inclusive of
indirect costs?
Answer 13: Statement of Interest applications must include the SF-424 and a Summary
Budget. See Answer 6 above for an example Summary Budget table, including a line
item for indirect costs.
Question 14: What are the allowable Indirect Costs or Facilities & Administrative (F&A)
costs on this grant for the U.S. Universities and non-University partners from the US and
other countries?
Answer 14: Information about allowable indirect costs can be found in 2 CFR 200.414.
Applicants must indicate in the Summary Budget of the SOI whether they are proposing
indirect costs or will charge all costs directly. Below are the most commonly used
Indirect Cost Rate methods:
Method 1 - Direct Charge Only
• Eligibility: Any applicant.
• Initial Application Requirements: See guidance on direct costs in 2 CFR 200.413.
Method 2 - Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA)
• Eligibility: Any applicant with a NICRA issued by a US Government Agency must
5

---

use that NICRA rate.
• Initial Application Requirements: If the applicant has a current NICRA and wishes to
charge indirect costs, that rate must be used in the Summary Budget included in the
SOI.
Method 3 - De minimis rate of 15% of modified total direct costs (MTDC)
• Eligibility: Any applicant that has never received a NICRA.
• Initial Application Requirements: 2 CFR 200.414(f) specifies that any non-Federal
entity that does not have a current negotiated (including provisional) rate, may elect
to charge a de minimis rate of up to 15 percent of modified total direct costs. Costs
must be consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs, and may not be double
charged or inconsistently charged as both. The applicant must describe which cost
elements it charges indirectly vs. directly. See 2 CFR 200.414(f) for further
information. The de minimis rate does not require documentation to justify its use and
may be used indefinitely. Once elected, the recipient or subrecipient must use the de
minimis rate for all Federal awards until the recipient or subrecipient chooses to
negotiate a negotiated rate. If the applicant does not have an approved NICRA and
does not elect to utilize the 15% de minimis rate, the Grant Officer will provide
further instructions and may request additional supporting information, including
financial statements and audits, should the application still be under consideration
after the merit review.
Question 15: Is there any limit on overhead/indirect costs?
Answer 15: Please refer Question 14 above for details on overhead/indirect costs.
Question 16: What is the allowable overhead rate (e.g. is it the NICRA for each University
applicant)?
Answer 16: Please refer Question 14 above for details on overhead/indirect costs.
Question 17: Should the budget be submitted as a (Word or PDF) table that follows this
guidance “Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit
within 1 page width,” or can it be submitted as a separate spreadsheet file (e.g., Excel)?
Answer 17: A Summary Budget should be submitted as an Annex to the SOI. The
Summary Budget can be incorporated into the combined SOI submission document as a
single PDF or Word file, not as a separate Excel file. See also Answer 6 above for a
Summary Budget Table example and Answer 67 below about SOI file submission
guidelines.
Question 18: To what extent is the State Department interested in proposals that plan to
seek additional funding to grow the program into a larger portfolio over a longer time
frame?
Answer 18: The SOI solicitation is a call for concept notes for programs of up to 60
6

---

months. Applications should propose a program that is likely to achieve intended results
with Federal funding. The recipient or subrecipient is encouraged to earn income to
defray program costs when appropriate. Program income must be used for the original
purpose of the Federal award. Program income earned during the period of performance
may only be used for costs incurred during the period of performance or allowable
closeout costs. See 2 CFR 200.307 - Program Income.
Question 19: Funding Mechanism: Buy-Ins & Associate Awards? In the past, Innovation
Lab award budgets included additional, authorized-but-unfunded award “ceiling” (above
the stated $20-40 million award amount), which allowed the lead awardee to accept
potential supplemental “buy-ins” or “associate awards” from other USG operating units.
Does DoS anticipate incorporating this kind of funding approach under new IL awards, to
allow for addition of potential future, supplemental activities within the general scope of
the award?
Answer 19: Individual awards may range from a minimum of $20 million to a maximum
of $40 million (approximately) over the life of the award. This includes potential use of
funding allocated to various operating units within the Department (e.g. functional
bureaus; regional bureaus; posts) to “buy in” to the lab for specific activities or technical
assistance and support.
Question 20: Cost Share: The solicitation explicitly states that “cost-sharing/matching will
not be evaluated as part of the merit review process” — however, it then prompts
applicants to submit cost-share estimates in not one or two but three separate places within
the initial 8-page Statement of Interest (sections (a.VII), (e), and (f)). Is this correct? Can
you clarify how DoS will use this information, if not for evaluating the merit of the initial
SOI?
Answer 20: The Department of State does not require a mandatory level of cost-sharing
(matching) for FtF Innovation Labs, but nevertheless cost-sharing may be proposed by
applicants as appropriate to achieve the SOI goals and objectives. A cost-share or match
is that portion of project or program costs not borne by the U.S. Government. Cost
sharing includes cash and in-kind contributions, and for U.S. organizations is subject to 2
CFR 200.306, which, among other things, requires that cost sharing be verifiable from
the Recipient’s records. Cost-sharing or matching is normally associated with
contributions from the same prime and sub-recipient sources that also receive Federal
funds under an award, but can include contributions from third parties. Recipients are
encouraged to identify opportunities to leverage private sector funds. As stated in the SOI
solicitation, “cost-sharing/matching will not be evaluated as part of the merit review
process” for the concept note evaluation. This information is not a scored element of the
concept note review, but will give the MRP a more complete picture of the resources
available for the proposed approach. The optional cost share estimates are to be included
in the form SF-424 and Summary Budget Annex, which do not count toward the 8-page
limit for the SOI. The request for narrative justification of Cost Share has been removed
from SOI requirements.
7

---

Question 21: Please can you help me identify the IDC rate?
Answer 21: See Answer 14 for details on Negotiated Indirect Cost Rates and de minimis
cost rates.
Question 22: We are considering a model in which a portion of research funding would be
competitively allocated through a formal Request for Proposals process, governed by a
Selection Board. Would this approach be acceptable under this award?
Answer 22: Yes. See also relevant answers in “Partnerships and Management Structure”
below.
Question 23: The SOI notes that total funding of $64 million is available in FY 2026, with
outyear funding subject to availability of funds. Could you provide additional clarity on
two related questions: (a) Should applicants assume annual funding will be roughly
consistent across the 60-month performance period, or should budgets be designed
conservatively to account for potential year-to-year variability? (b) Are there any known
constraints in the current federal funding environment that applicants should factor into
their project design or contingency planning for the full performance period?
Answer 23: (a) Summary Budgets are required to include total proposed costs; Annual
Detailed Budgets are not requested from applicants at the SOI stage. More information on
Detailed Budget requirements will be provided to selected applicants in the Request for
Full Proposals. (b) Funding for Innovation Lab project outyears is subject to
Congressional appropriations and the availability of funds.
Question 24: Does DoS anticipate that there will be additional funding made available to
innovation labs through associate awards or buy-ins?
Answer 24: The budget should be designed to achieve the program goals with a minimum
of $20 million to a maximum of $40 million and up to 5 years of programming over the
life of the award. Funding for all Innovation Lab programs is subject to Congressional
appropriations and the availability of funds. See also Answer 19.
Question 25: What percent of money should go outside USA? In USAID there was a push
to move more abroad but now with America, Safer, Stronger and More prosperous maybe
you have a guide?
Answer 25: See Answer 31 on subaward partnership approaches in the Partnerships and
Management Structure section. This solicitation does not have a required percentage of
funding for subawards. The Department of State welcomes proposals for a management
structure that adheres to eligibility requirements and reflects the overarching priorities
elaborated in the Statement of Interest call for concept notes. Applicants may propose
approaches that align with their organizational policy procedures, 2 CFR 200.331, and 2
CFR 200.318 - General procurement standards. See also 2 CFR 200.319 - Competition,
8

---

and 2 CFR 200.320(c) - Noncompetitive procurement.
Question 26: Will American graduate students be allowed to be funded under the new
Innovation Labs?
Answer 26: Graduate study may be included in proposed approaches. Please adhere to
allowable costs per 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E—Costs Principles.
Question 27: Will international graduate students, post-doctoral scholars, or visiting
scholars be allowed to be funded for study in the U.S. under the new Innovation Labs?
Answer 27: The Department of State will address any questions about international
student requirements during Phase 2 for any selected concepts that propose international
graduate students as part of their Innovation Lab program., Graduate study for
international students may be included in proposed approaches. Applicants should
demonstrate adequate consideration of benefits, risks, and costs of proposed approaches.
See 22 CFR Part 62 for applicable requirements. See also Answer 26 above.
Partnerships and Management Structure
Question 28: Would a consortium of more than one University and with entities in the
global south be evaluated better and a one entity submission?
Answer 28: All applications will be scored according to the review criteria outlined in the
SOI document, Section F.
Question 29: At the SOI stage, what level of formality is expected for private sector
partnerships — are letters of intent or named company commitments expected, or is a
conceptual description of the partnership strategy sufficient?
Answer 29: Letters of commitment are not requested as part of the concept note
submission per Section D of the SOI document.
Question 30: Can Management Entity leadership be co-managed with LMIC institutions?
Answer 30: The Department of State welcomes proposals for a management structure
that includes institutions in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) as subrecipients,
adheres to eligibility requirements, and reflects the overarching priorities elaborated in
the Statement of Interest call for concept notes.
9

---

Question 31: How much decentralization to partner institutions is acceptable?
Answer 31: The Department of State welcomes proposals for a management structure
that adheres to eligibility requirements and reflects the overarching priorities elaborated
in the Statement of Interest call for concept notes.
Question 32: Is there an advantage to partnering with minority-serving institution(s)?
Answer 32: U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners (i.e. sub-
recipients or contractors at various tiers) of the applicant, provided they are not excluded
from U.S. Government acquisition and assistance awards (this may be verified through
SAM.gov).
Question 33: Will the State Department allow an institution with a proven national and
global track record to lead the entire Innovation Lab network? This could greatly expedite
the establishment of the Innovation Labs, streamline agency interactions, and increase
accountability for outcomes and effectiveness.
Answer 33: The Department of State welcomes proposals for a management structure
that adheres to eligibility requirements and reflects the overarching priorities elaborated
in the Statement of Interest call for concept notes.
Question 34: Management Entity Governance: What are the expectations regarding
advisory boards or steering committees for the Management Entity? Should we consider
their integration into the Management Entity structure?
Answer 34: The Department of State welcomes proposals for a management structure
that adheres to eligibility requirements and reflects the overarching priorities elaborated
in the Statement of Interest call for concept notes.
Question 35: Do proposed subaward organizations need to have a Unique Entity Identifier
(UEI) at the pre-award stage?
Answer 35: Each applicant should adhere to regulations outlined in 2 CFR 200. See 2
CFR Part 25. For exceptions see 2 CFR 25.110. Most applicants will need to complete
the following:
(1) Be registered in SAM.gov before submitting an application;
(2) Maintain a current and active registration in SAM.gov at all times during
which it has an active Federal award as a recipient or an application under
consideration by a Federal agency. The applicant or recipient must review and
update its information in SAM.gov annually from the date of initial registration or
subsequent updates to ensure it is current, accurate, and complete. If applicable,
this includes identifying the applicant's or recipient's immediate and highest-level
owner and subsidiaries, as well as providing information on all predecessors that
have received a Federal award or contract within the last three years; and
10

---

(3) Include its UEI in each application it submits to the Federal agency.
At the time of application, the Prime Applicant must have both a UEI and active
SAM.gov registration. Both the Prime Applicant and proposed sub-awardees are
required to have UEI prior to award. Please refer to SOI section E.3.
Question 36: Competitive vs. Directed Sub-Award Process? In the past, the USG explicitly
required many Innovation Lab Management Entities to identify sub-awardees via open
competitive solicitations, as part of the program design. In contrast, this SOI solicitation
prompts applicants to identify sub-awardees up-front, at the time of SOI submission
(similar to earlier Consortium model ILs). Will DoS introduce additional requirements for
competitive sub-awards later in the procurement process, or can you confirm that DoS
prefers to finalize sub-awardees by the time of award issuance?
Answer 36: For any sub-awards that applicants proposed to be approved at the time of
award, applicants must submit information. However, it is not required for specific sub-
awardee organizations to be identified in the SOI. An applicant’s submission should have
the necessary information required to evaluate the application, and must adhere to 2 CFR
200.331 - Subrecipient and contractor determinations. There are no requirements in the
SOI for competitive subawards; applicants may propose approaches that align with their
organizational policy procedures, 2 CFR 200.331, and 2 CFR 200.318 - General
procurement standards. See also 2 CFR 200.319 - Competition, and 2 CFR 200.320(c) -
Noncompetitive procurement.
Question 37: Are there any stipulations/preferences for how the Management Entity (ME)
administers its research-for-development portfolio, specifically is there an expectation that
the ME competitively procure a portion of its activities? Or can the ME exclusively
commission activities from partners and other members of its network?
Answer 37: See answer 36 above.
Question 38: In addition to the subrecipients in the core team, does the Department of State
anticipate a competitive process for making awards to sub-grantees?
Answer 38: See answer 36 above.
Question 39: Can we fund directly U.S. companies doing work that meets the objectives of
the NOFO?
Answer 39: All types of U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners
(i.e. sub-recipients or contractors at various tiers) of the applicant, provided that they are
11

---

not excluded from U.S. Government acquisition and assistance awards (this may be
verified through SAM.gov). Private sector partners may be engaged in a variety of
proposed roles, including as sub-recipient, advisory board member, or cost-share
provider. See SOI Section C.1 and C.2.
Question 40: Do all partners have to be defined in the Statements of Interest, or could
additional partners be added if the SOI moves on to the full proposal stage?
Answer 40: Additional partners may be added if the SOI moves on to the full proposal
stage.
Question 41: Joint submissions: Some prior Innovation Lab NOFOs encouraged a two-
university Management Entity structure. For this competition, may two eligible institutions
jointly serve as the Management Entity (with one submitting as prime)? Is there any
preference regarding a multi-US university consortium structure at the SOI stage?
Answer 41: One prime applicant must be identified in the application. Per Section B:
“Eligibility” in the SOI document “Coordination with other eligible applicants and use of
a consortia approach is acceptable. In addition to applying as a Management Entity, an
organization may partner as a sub awardee under other eligible applications.” All types of
U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible as collaborating partners (i.e. sub-recipients or
contractors at various tiers) of the applicant, provided that they are not excluded from
U.S. Government acquisition and assistance awards (this may be verified through
SAM.gov). This may include sub-recipients that support management and coordination
functions.
Question 42: ME Structure: At the SOI stage, what level of specificity does DOS expect
regarding the Management Entity’s structure and responsibilities? Should applicants
describe a detailed portfolio management model (e.g., competitive subawards, thematic
research clusters, technology-to-scale pathways, MEL systems), or is a high-level
management framework sufficient for Phase 1?
Answer 42: Department of State welcomes proposals for a management structure that
adheres to eligibility requirements and reflects the overarching priorities elaborated in the
Statement of Interest call for concept notes. The SOI submission instructions do not
request a detailed management plan. The requested List of Partner Roles and
Responsibilities should include a summary of the management structure and the broad
approach to coordination. This should be a brief, preliminary characterization of roles and
responsibilities that may evolve significantly during the subsequent phase. See SOI
Section D.1.e.
Question 43: Is it favorable to work with key partners with a focus area or with large
organizations (NGOs), and research institutes?
Answer 43: Applicants should propose the partners that best support the achievement of
12

---

the programmatic objectives and areas of inquiry that are being pursued.
Programmatic
Question 44: Should a lab address all parts of any “area of inquiry”? For example, in the
nutrition, food systems and food safety area of inquiry: does the lab/proposal need to
address all 3, or would 1 or 2 be fine?
Answer 44: Applicants may submit concepts that align with one or both objectives and
one or multiple areas of inquiry or topics. As noted in the SOI: “Concepts do not need to
address every topic listed under an area of inquiry. The description of the areas of inquiry
are illustrative and may not include topics that reasonably fit within the area of inquiry.
Applicants may suggest topics that fit within the area of inquiry that are not listed.”
Question 45: Is an implementation/field implementation a required component of the
grant?
Answer 45: Section 103A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), as amended,
requires that agricultural research carried out under the Act …shall (1) take account of the
special needs of small farmers in the determination of research priorities, (2) include
research on the interrelationships among technology, institutions, and economic, social,
environmental, and cultural factors affecting small-farm agriculture, and (3) make
extensive use of field testing to adapt basic research to local conditions. See 22 USC
2151a-1. Finally, Congress provides that special emphasis shall be placed on
disseminating research results to the farms on which they can be put to use, and
especially on institutional and other arrangements needed to assure that small farmers
have effective access to both new and existing improved technology.
Question 46: Would the development of indices to guide decisions around food security and
import/export and trade vulnerabilities be eligible for this grant?
Answer 46: FTF Innovation Labs support impact through applied innovation (e.g. see
answer directly above). As stated in the SOI “This research is expected to generate
knowledge and new or improved technologies and practices, while also building linkages
to partners and activities that can transfer information and innovation into the hands of
stakeholders, where impacts may be achieved.”
Question 47: Given the eight-page limit at the SOI stage, what level of detail is expected in
describing a scaling strategy? Specifically, are reviewers looking for named scaling
partners and defined handoff mechanisms at this stage, or is it sufficient to articulate the
theory of change and the types of partnerships that would be pursued during
implementation?
Answer 47: Please refer to the purpose of the SOI (page 5). The submission of the SOI is
13

---

the first step of a two-step process. Applicants are invited to submit a concise (maximum
of 8-page) Statement of Interest (SOI) that clearly communicates project ideas, objectives
and approach. This is not a full proposal and this phase will not result in a federal
assistance award. Rather, the SOI process allows applicants to submit project ideas for
evaluation prior to the development of a full application and reference the SOI objectives
and Key Issues and Approaches in Sections C.1 and C.2 for suggestions on the level of
detail.
Question 48: Will the State Department prefer to use the design or structure of prior
Innovation Labs, or is it envisioning an entirely new model? For example, previous
Innovation Labs included a central management entity and a portfolio of competitively
awarded research subawards. They also secured Associate Awards under the Leader
Award mechanism to implement specific activities not originally included under the Leader
Award. Should we anticipate a similar structure, or a different approach
Answer 48: Applications should detail a proposed approach that will ensure the scientific
quality and relevance of the portfolio, and accountability to ensure effective, efficient
implementation of the award’s stated objectives and activities, and for meeting
administrative and compliance requirements.
Question 49: How should considerations related to equal opportunity, youth engagement,
and broad participation be addressed in the SOI?
Answer 49: Please note, if the place of performance or delivery of any award made under
this Statement of Interest will be within the United States, applicants are advised that they
will be required to certify the following at the time of award:
o Its compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is
material to the government’s payment decisions for purposes of section 3729(b)(4) of
title 31, United States Code and;
o It does not operate any programs promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion that
violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws. A program promoting
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion means a program whose purpose is to promote
preferences based on race, color religion, sex, or national origins, such as in training
or hiring.
Applicants should review the U.S. Department of State Standard Terms and Conditions
published on the Department of State’s Federal Assistance Policies & Appeals website, 2
CFR Part 200, and 2 CFR Chapter VI.
Question 50: What qualifies as credible long-term sustainability, beyond 60 months?
14

---

Answer 50: Please see SOI Section D.1.d: “Anticipated Outcomes and Results: Identify
the specific outcomes and results the approach/activities seeks to achieve and define
“success.” Identify Outcomes and results that can be achieved during the program’s
lifetime as well as any potential “quick wins” that may be delivered in the earlier phases
of the work. The nature, scope, and sustainability of outcomes and results will be critical
to assessing the costs and benefits – and determining whether the SOI will proceed to the
next stage of the merit review process.”
Question 51: How much weight is given to artificial intelligence integration?
Answer 51: Proposed approaches should be justified and considered using the
overarching objectives and areas of inquiry for this call for concept notes. SOI Section
C.2 describes themes to include in program design, which include leveraging cutting-
edge American technology and innovation using of a range of advances, such as Artificial
Intelligence and digital solutions. Application review criteria are included in SOI Section
F.
Question 52: Artificial Intelligence: The NOFO encourages leveraging AI and digital
solutions. Are there any constraints or expectations applicants should be aware of at the
SOI stage (e.g., data governance requirements, cybersecurity standards, preferred types of
decision-support tools, expectations regarding open data, or limits on stand-alone modeling
activities)? How should AI-enabled research be framed to align with DOS priorities?
Answer 52: Any technologies proposed must conform to the applicable rules and
regulations of both the US and the target country they are practiced or researched in.
Applicants should review the U.S. Department of State Standard Terms and Conditions
published on the Department of State’s Federal Assistance Policies & Appeals website, 2
CFR Part 200, and 2 CFR Chapter VI.
Question 53: What data sharing/governance structures are recommended?
Answer 53: The Department will not make recommendations on specific data
sharing/governance structures. Additional resources are available at resources.data.gov.
Question 54: Does aquaculture research fit within the scope of this RFP?
15

---

Answer 54: Yes. Refer to SOI Section C.1 Area of Inquiry 1.2, livestock and animal
health.
Question 55: Does the State Department consider genomic trait discovery for crops to be
included in “technologies and/or methods to enhance resilience to crop threats”?
Answer 55: The Department can consider genomic trait discovery for crops as aligned
with Area of Inquiry 1.1 or 2.1. Proposed approaches should be justified and considered
using the overarching objectives and areas of inquiry for this call for concept notes.
Question 56: Is there a preference for statements of interest that consider multiple topics
within the Areas of Inquiry or that focus on one specific topic?
Answer 56: Please refer to page 12 of the SOI document, “Each SOI may be responsive
to either a single or multiple objectives and areas of inquiry.”
Question 57: Capacity building: With respect to research capacity in non-US institutions,
the NOFO discusses “enhance leveraging of capacity and resources for maximum impact,
achieving buy-in from practitioners, achieving scale, and crowding in resources” and
“build the capacity of research institutions, agricultural sectors, and food systems around
the world, better equipping other governments with the tools they need to feed their own
populations”. However, it does not explicitly prioritize local research capacity
strengthening at the individual or institutional level within low- and middle-income
countries, which was a central feature of prior Innovation Labs. Should applicants
interpret local research capacity building (e.g., LMIC university partnerships, graduate
training, institutional strengthening) as a core priority for this competition, or is it
considered secondary relative to other objectives?
Answer 57: Capacity development is referenced among key issues in SOI Section C.2.
Please refer to the Objectives in the SOI solicitation, noting “The overarching objectives
and areas of inquiry of the program will benefit the American people and the people in
the countries in which we provide assistance”.
Question 58: Area of Inquiry 2.1: Area of Inquiry 2.1 begins with “improving breeding
activities,” yet the listed examples include supply chains, food loss and waste, food
processing and preservation, food safety, value addition, and financing/incentives—many
of which are not breeding-related. Should applicants interpret Area 2.1 as broadly
16

---

inclusive of nutrition, food systems, and food safety research beyond breeding? Specifically,
does DOS welcome research on non-breeding pathways to improved nutrition—such as
diet quality, consumer demand and behavior, food environments, affordability,
fortification, safety risk perceptions, and policy or market incentives—as fully responsive
under Objective 2?
Answer 58: Please see page 10 of the SOI document, “Additionally, the description of the
areas of inquiry are illustrative and may not include topics that reasonably fit within the
area of inquiry. Applicants may suggest topics that fit within the area of inquiry that are
not listed.”
Question 59: Are there any restrictions on food processing technologies?
Answer 59: Please see page 10 of the SOI document, “Additionally, the description of the
areas of inquiry are illustrative and may not include topics that reasonably fit within the
area of inquiry. Applicants may suggest topics that fit within the area of inquiry that are
not listed.” Note, any technologies proposed must conform to the rules and regulations
of both the US and target country they are practiced or researched in.
Question 60: Should the Innovation Lab focus on foods imported into the US?
Answer 60: Applicants should prioritize activities, crops, commodities, foods or
agricultural systems based on the ability to meet one or both of the objectives of the
program outlined in Section C.1 of the SOI solicitation.
Question 61: What are the commodities and cropping systems of interest?
Answer 61: See Answer 60 above.
Key Personnel
Question 62: Does the Department of State require (and/or prefer) the inclusion of key
personnel, for example a Lab/Program Director or Manager? If so, what is the required
level of effort for this (these) role(s)?
Answer 62: The application contents in Section D.1.e requires that applicants: “Identify
organization name, point of contact, point of contact information (phone and email),
federal share to be award by the pass-through entity, cost-share (if applicable), and a
summary of proposed roles and responsibilities. Include a summary of the management
structure and the broad approach to coordination. Note: This should be a brief,
preliminary characterization of roles and responsibilities that may evolve significantly
during the subsequent phase.” Key personnel are not required at this phase. Following
the merit review, the subset of applicants invited to submit a full proposal will be
17

---

provided with additional instructions regarding the requirements for that phase.
Monitoring and Evaluation
Question 63: What indicators will be prioritized (e.g., yield, income, nutrition, trade value,
U.S. export growth, etc.) for the MEL Framework?
Answer 63: Specific indicators are not required for this phase of the solicitation. Please
refer to the SOI Section C “Program Description” as well as Section F “Application
Review Information” to support your planning.
Question 64: Will there be required cross-lab indicators that we should consider?
Answer 64: Specific indicators are not required for this phase of the solicitation. Please
refer to the SOI Section C “Program Description” section as well as Section F
“Application Review Information” to support your planning.
Question 65: How much emphasis will be placed on measurable “quick wins”?
Answer 65: Applications will be reviewed for how they meet the entirety of the review
criteria. Please refer to the review criteria in Section F.1 of the SOI which explain how
concept notes will be reviewed. Also refer to Section D Application Contents and
Format - Anticipated Outcomes and Results: “Identify the specific outcomes and results
the approach/activities seeks to achieve and define “success.” Identify Outcomes and
results that can be achieved during the program’s lifetime as well as any potential “quick
wins” that may be delivered in the earlier phases of the work. The nature, scope, and
sustainability of outcomes and results will be critical to assessing the costs and benefits –
and determining whether the SOI will proceed to the next stage of the merit review
process.”
Statement of Interest Application / Submission Guidelines
Question 66: Page 9: “Applicants may submit up to two (2) applications as the
Management Entity (ME).” Is this limit at the stage of this Phase 1 (SOI) or the Phase 2
(Full proposal)?
18

---

Answer 66: Institutions responding to this call for Statements of Interest may: a) submit
up to two SOI applications as the lead applicant (ME) at this phase; and additionally b)
participate as a sub-awardee on multiple submissions if desired.
Question 67: Should the SOI be submitted as one PDF file with all the content (technical
and budget) or in other format (e.g., MS Word for technical sections and MS Excel for
Budget)?
Answer 67: The SOI and all accompanying documents can be combined into a single
document for submission, in a searchable and editable PDF or Word format, with the
exception of the required form SF-424. The Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)
must be submitted separately, with any applicable attachments added within the form
where indicated.
Question 68: Does the 8-page limit include the table listing that is required as mentioned on
page # 13 of the document?
Answer 68: The 8-page limit does not include the table listing that is required as
mentioned on page #13 of the document.
Question 69: Is there a set format for the Past Performance that you would like the
applicants to follow? Or can we create our own template with the information required in
section g under Application Content and Format?
Answer 69: There is not a required format for the requested Past Performance
information, and applicants may create their own template that includes the information
required under Application Content and Format.
Question 70: Is the table with the critical details considered the first page or cover page,
and does it count towards the 8-page limit?
Answer 70: The table with critical details may be considered the cover page and does not
count toward the 8-page limit.
Question 71: On page 9 of the NOFO, it states “Applicants may submit up to two (2)
applications as the Management Entity (ME).” Does the word “applications” in this context
mean the “statement of interest” that is due April 3rd? Or does it mean full applications
after SOI review and selection to submit a full proposal?
Answer 71: The term “applications” in this context refers to the submission of statements
of interest that are described in Section D.1 and due on April 9, 2026.
Question 72: For Phase 1 – Statement of Interest (SOI), the required information list
includes:
19

---

a. Table Listing of Critical Details:
b. Issues/challenges/opportunities
c. Proposed solution/activities
d. Anticipated outcomes and results
e. list of partner roles and responsibilities
f. Resource contributions and/or cost share from non-federal sources
g. Relevant past performance annex (not counted towards 8-page limit)
h. SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) (not counted towards 8-page limit)
In which section of this requested information should we include the budget? Is the budget
to be submitted part of the 8-page content limit?
Answer 72: Budget information should be included in Application for Federal Assistance
Form SF-424, which does not count toward the page limit. The budget information must
include the cumulative Total Federal Share requested for the applicant and for any
proposed subaward organizations.
A Summary Budget should also be provided as an Annex, which does not count toward
the page limit. See also Answer 6 above.
Geographic Focus / Location
Question 73: The solicitation notes that geographic target areas should reflect activities and
partnerships in “low- to middle-income countries.” Could you please confirm whether this
includes all middle-income countries, or if the eligibility is intended to be limited
specifically to low-income and lower-middle-income countries, excluding upper-middle-
income contexts?
Answer 73: For the purposes of this solicitation, country income classifications are
defined by the World Bank using the GNI per capita (Atlas method) -- see
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-
and-lending-groups. Therefore, “low- to middle-income countries” as referenced in the
SOI Section C.3, refers to: low-income, lower-middle income, and upper-middle income
countries.
Question 74: The opportunity document shows middle-income countries as possible target
countries. Would this mean that countries in the Andean Region qualify? More specifically,
Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia.
Answer 74: Applicants may propose activities in middle-income countries, noting the
considerations listed in Section C.3 (i.e. alignment with foreign policy goals of the United
States; opportunities to promote trade, cooperation, and investment; and ability to reduce
requirements for foreign aid). Please also refer to the review criteria in Section F.1 of the
SOI which explain how concept notes will be reviewed. Selection of geographic locations
should also be considered with the lens of the review criteria.
Question 75: Will reviewers apply any preference to SOIs focused on countries in the
20

---

Western Hemisphere versus other low- and middle-income country regions prone to
scarcity? We want to understand how reviewers will balance the program's food security
objectives against current geographic foreign policy priorities when evaluating competing
applications.
Answer 75: Applications will be reviewed for how they meet the entirety of the review
criteria and meet the stated objectives. Please refer to the review criteria in Section F.1 of
the SOI which explain how concept notes will be reviewed. Applicants should
incorporate geographic priority suggestions as listed in Section C.3 (Priority Regions).
Question 76: Are there specific countries or sub-regions within the Western Hemisphere
that the Department of State is particularly interested in seeing targeted in applications,
given current foreign policy priorities?
Answer 76: See Answer 75 above.
Question 77: Does the “own hemisphere” imply countries in North America, Central
America, South America, and the Caribbean?
Answer 77: The reference to “own hemisphere” on page 3 of the SOI document is
referring to the Western Hemisphere. The SOI document has been amended on page 3 to
reflect this clarification.
Question 78: Are countries with full or partial US travel bans eligible as target countries?
Answer 78: A U.S. travel ban or Level 4 advisory does not automatically make a country
ineligible as a target for foreign assistance. However, such designations signal potentially
serious concerns that may affect program design, approval, and implementation.
Applicants may expect additional scrutiny, possible restrictions, and a requirement to
demonstrate robust risk mitigation in any resultant award. Carefully review the SOI to
make a determination before submitting a proposal. Be aware that approval is not
guaranteed, and operational realities may prevent implementation if funding is awarded.
Question 79: Can applicants propose work in countries in which the State Department has
issued a Level 4: Do Not Travel advisory?
Answer 79: Please see Answer 78 above.
21

---

Question 80: Do the countries need to be on the TAA compliant list?
Answer 80: No. Please refer to Section C.3 of the SOI for priority regions.
Question 81: To what extent should applicants consider previous Feed the Future target
countries and investments in proposing new activities under this solicitation?
Answer 81: Applicants should consider geographic priorities as presented in Section C.3
of the SOI document (“Priority Regions”) and are not restricted to previous Feed the
Future target countries.
Question 82: Is there a limit on the number of countries that should be included in a
proposal?
Answer 82: There is not a limit on the number of countries that may be included in the
proposal. Note that the review criteria will “consider the proposed staffing footprint,
geographic locations and network/relationship maturity to ensure the ability to achieve
objectives”.
Question 83: Will statements of interest that include work in Sub-Saharan Africa be
viewed favorably?
Answer 83: Statements of interest that include work in Sub-Saharan Africa will be
evaluated using the scoring criteria elaborated in the Statement of Interest document in
Section F.1, and considering geographic priority suggestions in Section C.3 (Priority
Regions).
Question 84: Any suggestions on target countries. This hemisphere is clear and by which I
mean Central/South and not Western Africa which is in part in our hemisphere. But what
countries in Africa or Asia are you looking to.
Answer 84: Applicants should consider geographic priorities as presented in Section C.3
of the SOI document (“Priority Regions”).
22

---

Question 85: Is there a preference for statements of interest that focus on a specific region
or that take a global approach?
Answer 85: There is no stated preference for statements of interest that focus on a
specific region or that take a global approach. Applicants should refer to Section C.3. of
the SOI.
Question 86: Target Countries: The NOFO requires listing “Target Benefiting Country or
Countries.” At the SOI stage, must applicants specify a fixed set of countries, or is it
acceptable to propose a regional approach or an initial set of priority countries with
flexibility for refinement during co-design in Phase 2? How specific should country
selection be at this stage? If a preferred country list exists, can DOS share it?
Answer 86: It is acceptable at this stage to propose a regional approach or an initial set of
priority countries. Please also refer to the review criteria in the SOI, which includes
Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives.
Question 87: Will the Merit Review Panel prioritize applications that focus geographic
targeting on the Western Hemisphere, and how should applicants weight the impact on
U.S. agricultural competitiveness versus host-country food security.
Answer 87: Applicants should consider geographic priorities as presented in Section C.3
of the SOI document (“Priority Regions”). Please also refer to the review criteria in the
SOI, which includes Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives.
Question 88: What countries/regions are of interest and/or priority? Section 3 mentions
priority regions but there isn’t list of specific regions or countries, nor a link to a list. Is it
more favorable to work in Central/South America?
Answer 88: Applicants should consider geographic priorities as presented in Section C.3
of the SOI document (“Priority Regions”). Please also refer to the review criteria in the
SOI, which includes Program Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives.
23

---

Question 89: Is there a list that constitutes the State Department’s definition of Lower- and
Middle-Income countries?
Answer 89: Please see Answer 73 above.
Award Mechanism and Substantial Involvement
Question 90: Please provide examples of the “ongoing technical assistance and guidance
integral to the project's execution” that the Department of State may provide.
Understanding this will help us build State Department review milestones appropriately
into our project timeline and budget.
Answer 90: The Grants Officer will determine the appropriate level of substantial
involvement based on the programmatic requirements of the award and include those
elements of substantial involvement as needed. Additional information regarding
substantial involvement will be provided during the request for full application stage for
selected concepts.
Question 91: Assistance Mechanism: Although the assistance type is listed as “Grant or
Cooperative Agreement,” the NOFO describes examples of substantial involvement.
Should the SOI remain neutral pending final determination of the assistance mechanism or
should applicants assume a cooperative agreement structure for planning purposes and
propose governance mechanisms (e.g., joint steering committee, approval processes)?
Answer 91: The degree to which the government is potentially involved in the program
would determine the mechanism between a Grant or Cooperative Agreement. Each
eligible program will be evaluated, and substantial involvement will be determined in
consultation with each implementer. Additional information regarding substantial
involvement will be provided during the request for full application stage for selected
concepts.
Question 92: Funding Mechanism: Grant vs Cooperative Agreement? The solicitation (p.
6) indicates that DoS will issue the new IL awards as either grants or cooperative
agreements. What factors will DoS use to determine which of these two funding
mechanisms they will use for a given award? (The “substantial involvement” provision on
p.12 would seem to imply only Cooperative Agreements.)
Answer 92: Please see Answer 91 above.
Other
Question 93: Merit Review Panel (MRP) Composition: Sharing some general information
24

---

about the review panel can help applicants frame and communicate their intended
program as clearly as possible to their audience—benefiting both applicants and DoS
reviewers by more accurately communicating details of the proposed program in accessible
terms, and allowing faster, more streamlined review. To this end, can DoS share any
information regarding the general composition of the MRP? (e.g., will reviewers primarily
consist of scientists with deep technical expertise in the relevant field? Diplomatic and
development professionals from within the USG? etc.)
Answer 93: The Department will not provide specific details on the composition of this
review panel. Merit review panels are generally composed of technical experts and
stakeholders. Panelists must be impartial and possess enough expertise and knowledge of
the program to be able to evaluate an application for its value, quality and likelihood of
success. In most cases, merit review panels include representatives from the appropriate
Department of State functional bureau and/or regional bureau (to include feedback from
U.S. embassies). In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other
Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or
boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that
are in a public-private partnership with DoS. All panelists sign non-disclosure agreements
and conflict of interest agreements.
Question 94: After receipt of Statements of Interest, will the Department of State conduct
any match-making that may result in two or more applications being requested to combine
for the full proposal?
Answer 94: The Department of State does not plan to conduct match-making and will
not share applicant statements of interest with other applicants.
Question 95: Is there an expectation of a competitive call for proposal process after
Innovation Labs are selected, or can a consortium approach be proposed?
Answer 95: As stated in SOI section B.3., coordination with other eligible applicants and
use of a consortia approach is acceptable. See Answers 7 and 36 for information about
competition.
Question 96: Is it anticipated that there will be additional requests for applications for
innovation labs in FY2027 or future years?
Answer 96: Additional requests for applications for FtF Innovation Labs may be released
in future years, subject to Congressional appropriations and availability of funding.
25

---

Question 97: Is it possible for the proposed innovation labs to be linked to the former
USAID FtF innovation labs?
Answer 97: Previous experience implementing an FtF Innovation Lab and other
programs that demonstrate organizational capacity to implement similar awards may be
included in the requested Relevant Past Performance Annex.
26

---

SF424

The document you are trying to load requires Adobe Reader 8 or higher. You may not have the
Adobe Reader installed or your viewing environment may not be properly configured to use
Adobe Reader.
For information on how to install Adobe Reader and configure your viewing environment please
see http://www.adobe.com/go/pdf_forms_configure.