Funding Opportunity Numbers: HRSA-24-039 and HRSA-24-040.
Note to potential applicant: As a combined Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), titled the Maternal and Child Health (MCH) – Improving Oral Health Integration (IOHI) Program, this list of Frequently Asked Questions will respond to both competing projects: MCH-IOHI Demonstration Projects (MCH-IOHI Projects) and MCH-IOHI National Consortium (MCH-IOHI Consortium). We will indicate prior to the stated question if it is directed to one or both projects (that is Projects, Consortium, or Both).
Eligibility
Both: Are organizations in the District of Columbia and the eight U.S. territories eligible to apply for the MCH-IOHI Program?
Yes, applications from organizations in the District of Columbia and eight U.S. territories are eligible to apply. The eight US territories refers to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau.
Both: Are state governments and local jurisdictions eligible to apply for HRSA-24-039?
Yes, any agency or organization representing a state government or local jurisdiction is a public agency and eligible to apply for HRSA-24-039 and HRSA-24-040.
Projects: I would like clarification as to whether multiple organizations from the same state may apply, essentially competing against each other OR is it only one application per state?
Yes, there is nothing in the NOFO that prevents multiple organizations in one state may apply. HRSA will fund up to seven awards in seven different states. Multiple organizations in one state, that are interested in this funding opportunity, are encouraged to work together to minimize competition.
Projects: I wanted to confirm regarding eligibility for the HRSA-24-039 funding opportunity, does the lead organization have to reside within the state it is applying?
No. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents an organization from residing in another state. We do wish to point out the intentional use of “your state” in the NOFO’s Program Requirements and Expectations (beginning on page 9) and the Narrative Guidance (beginning on page 19). HRSA does expect the Demonstration Project to focus on one state.
Consortium: Is HRSA looking to have the Consortium in a different state than the seven Demonstration Project awardees?
There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents two different applicant organizations, that reside in the same state, from applying and receiving separate awards. That is to say one organization applies for and receives the HRSA-24-039 award, and another organization applies for and receives the HRSA-24-040 award. Given the instruction that one applicant organization is advised not to apply for both awards, the applicant will want to make very clear that this is the case.
Combined NOFO
Both: Why does the NOFO include instruction for both funding opportunities, the MCH-IOHI Projects and the MCH-IOHI Consortium?
This NOFO introduces you to HRSA’s MCH-IOHI Program. This program consists of two funding opportunities, the MCH-IOHI Projects and Consortium. This program depends on a collaborative approach between the MCH-IOHI Projects and Consortium. For this reason, all applicants, for either the MCH-IOHI Project or Consortium awards, are encouraged to read the NOFO’s Purpose (pages 1-2) and the Program Requirements and Expectations (pages 9-19).
Reminder: Though this NOFO includes application instructions for the two separate project competitions, you may only apply for the MCH-IOHI Projects (HRSA-24-039) or the MCH-IOHI Consortium (HRSA-24-040), but not both awards.
Program Objectives
Both: Are additional objectives beyond what's listed in the NOFO required? Could you please provide clarification on the relationship between the Program Objectives, found on page 2 of the NOFO, and the project’s SMARTIE objectives, described in the Project Narrative instruction for Approach on page 22 in the NOFO?
Yes, both the MCH-IOHI Projects and MCH-IOHI Consortium applicants are instructed to identify project-specific goals and SMARTIE objectives (strategic, measurable, ambitious, realistic, time-bound, inclusive, and equitable) that respond to both the Program Objectives and the required measures outlined in the NOFO, see pages 2 and 17-19. For HRSA funding opportunity announcements with multiple recipients, such as the MCH-IOHI Projects, the Program Objectives reflect the collective performance expected among the seven MCH-IOHI Project award recipients. For a funding opportunity announcement with a single award, such as the MCH-IOHI Consortium, the Program Objectives reflect the performance expected of the one award recipient.
MCH-IOHI projects state and local approach
Projects: Is the $425,000 award an annual award or the total award for the four year project?
The HRSA-24-039, MCH-IOHI Demonstration Projects, will each receive up to $425,000 per year for each year of the performance period.
Projects: Was the MCH-IOHI Projects, HRSA-24-039, previously funded and are there incumbent award recipients?
No, the MCH-IOHI Projects, HRSA-24-039, funding opportunity is not a recompeting funding opportunity. There are no incumbents and any potential applicant, who is eligible, is welcome to apply.
Projects: Why is there a focus on both state and local outcomes for the MCH-IOHI Projects?
HRSA elevated the focus on integrated prevented oral health care with the 2014 release of Integration of Oral Health and Primary Care Practice (PDF - 783 KB), which aimed to support integrated preventive oral health care in primary care services. Based on this report, we funded, in 2019, the Networks for Oral Health Integration Within the Maternal and Child Health Safety Net (NOHI) program to further develop and test models of integrated preventive oral health care in primary care settings. The NOHI projects have since demonstrated that with adequate funding and TA support, primary care providers can increase access to integrated preventive oral health care services. In addition to changes in practice models and provider skills where care is received, other effective approaches to advancing integrated preventive oral health care include enhancing both Medicaid payments for oral health care and the scope of state practice acts. Also, reporting reduction of state-wide oral health disparities will rely on recording oral health improvements across the state, which will require enhancements in state-based data collection and surveillance (see page 3 in the NOFO).
Projects: Is there a specific oral health literacy knowledge gap analysis tool that is recommended? Taking a look at the paper that is referenced in the NOFO, “The Evolving Role of Health Literacy in Improving Oral Health,” there are multiple tools for individuals within the public setting and tools for dental providers that are mentioned. There is no mention of a specific tool for organizations or different types of health professionals. Is this a tool we are expected to develop?
There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from developing your own tool or to seek guidance elsewhere to accomplish this task.
Projects: In using the Capacity Inventory Tool for Integrating Oral Health Care in Primary Care for Pregnant Women as part of the State Core Function Policy and Practice, do the identified improvement strategies need to be focused on pregnant people or can they be targeted towards other mentioned populations (infants (< 1 year), children (1–21 years), or children and youth with special health care needs (1–21 years)?
No, your improvement strategies will be focused on the target population you select for the MCH-IOHI Project. The Consortium will assist in the use of this tool for all MCH populations (see pages 11 and 13 of the NOFO).
Projects: Would we be compliant with the program requirements if we focus on ages 6 months to 5 years in our proposal?
Yes. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents selecting an age range that does not include the entire age range used to describe MCH populations in MCHB’s reporting requirements. For the age range you propose, we will expect you to separate your data to align with the two target populations: (6 months – up to 1 year) and children (1-5 years).
Projects: What is meant by "three sites" for the demonstration project? Do you mean three communities or would three sites in one community be appropriate? Do they have to be different in type of setting or all the same (such as a school-based clinic, FQHC, etc.)?
The NOFO uses the term “primary care setting.” The NOFO refers to a primary care setting as a location where one will receive primary care. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from selecting three of the same or different primary care settings. Also there is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from selecting primary care settings in one community or three different communities. As instructed in the NOFO, you will begin with no less than three primary care settings to produce conclusive results (see page 13). And you will aim to validate a replicable, evidence-based/ -informed model of care that integrates preventive oral health and primary care at participating primary care settings, serving a sufficient volume of the population to produce conclusive results that demonstrate progress towards the required measures using the agreed set of common metrics (see page 12).
Projects: Is it acceptable for the 3 primary care settings to all be within one system or organization? Or is the goal to incorporate oral health into three different organizations?
The NOFO does not prevent you from selecting three primary care settings within one organized healthcare delivery system. The NOFO states the project proposed will include a sufficient volume of the target population to produce conclusive results (page 12), with the expectation that the project will start with no less than three primary care settings to produce results when first testing the selected model of care (page 13). HRSA does expect it will take more than 3 settings to achieve conclusive results.
In addition, HRSA expects the two-tier, state and local, approach (described on pages 1 and 11-14) to result in state-wide improvements. HRSA is interested in a state and local approach that increases access to preventive oral health care among the MCH populations who live in underserved communities (no matter the healthcare delivery system). Also, HRSA is interested in a state and local approach that will improve oral health equity among this population across the state.
Project: We are particularly interested in understanding whether the home health services provided by three distinct groups could be considered as separate primary care settings. The programs provide comprehensive services, including access to community resources and support and a timely referral service for medical care and dentists.
No. The home health services you’ve described does not include the provision of a range of prevention, wellness, and treatment for common illnesses.
We use the definition for primary care as defined on HealthCare.gov, an official website of the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The NOFO refers to a primary care setting as a location where primary care is received, to include (as defined by CMS) a range of prevention, wellness, and treatment for common illnesses. Specific to this project, this location is where preventive oral health care and primary care will be integrated.
Projects: The NOFO says we need to pick one age category: pregnant individuals (all ages) and/or infants (< 1 year), children (1–21 years), or children and youth with special health care needs (1–21 years). Do we need to use the same age category for each participating site, or can we have a different age category for different sites?
There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from selecting a different population for different sites. As instructed in the NOFO, you will justify the selection of the target population with data (see page 10) and describe your plan in your Project Narrative (see page 19). Also, you will want to be mindful of the merit review criteria as outlined in Section V. Application Review Information (see page 28).
Project: Regarding the IOHI Demonstration Project proposal, what language is HRSA preferring we use? Pregnant women or pregnant individuals?
HRSA does not expect one term versus the other. The use of one or both terms will be acceptable.
Projects: Do we use the existing NOHI evidence based models and apply these models to our state?
No, the NOFO acknowledges (see page 4) that the MCHB-funded NOHI program has developed and is testing models of integrated POHC in primary care settings and that their performance to date demonstrates that with adequate funding and TA support, primary care providers can increase access to integrated POHC services. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from using other evidence-based/-informed models of care. We do expect that the model of care you select, to integrate preventive oral health care and primary care services in a primary care setting, will include at a minimum: an oral health risk assessment, oral health screening, oral health anticipatory guidance, preventive oral health care services (such as fluoride varnish), and dental referrals for non-urgent (maintenance) and urgent (comprehensive) treatment, as needed (see page 13).
Projects: It seems the MCH-IOHI Alliance should be involved in the determination of the target population, practice sites, and evidence informed interventions. Can you let me know if applicants are supposed to included specific target populations, primary care sites, and an evidence informed interventions in the application? Can we talk generally about the needs of the MCH population in our state, how the practice sites might be determined, and offer some evidence-informed options.
Criterion 2 (Response) on page 29 seeks to determine the extent to which the activities described in the application address the problem (including the needs identified) and are capable to attaining the project objectives (including the required measures). While you make an excellent point that the Alliance may have input into the final work plan, the applicant is expected to propose a target population, at least three primary care sites, and an evidence-informed intervention for implementation. With that said, there is nothing in the NOFO that prevents the applicant from proposing a plan along with justification as to why the Alliance may offer revisions. Relevant to your questions is the instruction that the applicant’s work plan will be operational within 9 months from the award (see pages 3 and 30). This final work plan will be approved by the project officer before it is considered final. As instructed on page six, the Demonstration Project award recipient will collaborate with HRSA staff to plan and develop project activities, including the development of strategies (see second bullet).
Projects: Do the MCH-IOHI Alliance members serve as the State Implementation (SI) Coordinator and the Primary Care Integration (PCI) Coordinator positions? Or are these positions separate from the Alliance Members?
Regarding the MCH-IOHI Alliance members and their tasks to assume, you will find on pages 10, 11, and 13 of the NOFO. HRSA advises the Alliance members take leadership roles in the coordination, implementation, and evaluation of all state and local core function activities. The NOFO instruction does not prevent you from selecting other staff to assume the roles of the SI and PCI Coordinator.
Projects: Can one FTE fill multiple roles? For example: can the State Implementation Lead by the same person as the Primary Care Integration Coordinator? With the number of recommended roles to be covered by awardees is it expected that there be a set number of FTEs on the grant? Because the grant requires collaboration at the state and local levels would the FTEs from local partners be included in the state's organizational chart?
HRSA does not designate a required number of FTEs. The roles identified in this NOFO are recommended, suggested, or advised by HRSA. These roles are not required. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from assigning multiple roles to one FTE. HRSA does expect key staff have adequate time devoted to the project to achieve project objectives (see page 32).
The organizational chart requested in this NOFO (see page 25) will be a one-page figure that depicts the organizational structure of the project.
Learning collaborative participation and technical assistance
Both: What type of technical assistance can the MCH-IOHI Projects expect from the MCH-IOHI Consortium?
MCH-IOHI Projects will participate in an MCH-IOHI Consortium-led MCH-IOHI learning collaborative to foster consensus and a joint approach among the projects. The MCH-IOHI Consortium will support team building and peer-to-peer learning among all projects. The Consortium will also assist with the MCH-IOHI Projects’ state and local improvement strategies, and coordinating common project activities to show collective impact and progress towards the project’s required measures (see pages 10 and 15-16 in the NOFO).
Consortium: What type of technical assistance can all states and jurisdictions expect from the MCH-IOHI Consortium?
The MCH-IOHI Consortium will deliver universal TA to all states and jurisdictions. On page 17 of the NOFO, this TA is described as information and resources received by individuals or organizations through their own initiative or Consortium-led TA. Individuals who receive universal TA can include health professionals, program administrators, educators, and others working in or with MCH programs. Organizations who receive universal TA can include, but are not limited to, state Title V agencies and state oral health programs.
Both: Can you clarify whether the Environmental Scan and Capacity Inventory Tool are requirements for the Projects, Consortium, or both?
The MCH-IOHI Projects are expected to complete these two resources, two core function activities that will be coordinated by the MCH-IOHI Consortium. On page 10 of the NOFO, under Program Requirements and Expectations, overarching MCH-IOHI Project expectations include participation in an MCH-IOHI Consortium-led learning collaborative to foster consensus and a joint approach. Also the Consortium will coordinate common project activities to show collective impact. As instructed on page 16, the MCH-IOHI Consortium will assist the MCH-IOHI Projects in common activities, this includes the state core function 1 activities listed on page 11 (which include the Environmental Scan and Capacity Inventory Tool).
Both: Are MCH-IOHI Projects required to share all data, reports, and other relevant information with the MCH-IOHI Consortium?
Yes, the MCH-IOHI Consortium will lead the coordination of common MCH-IOHI Project activities, to show collective impact and progress, including the collection of data. Activities include a Consortium-led agreement among the projects to identify a set of common metrics, common definitions, and methods for data collection and analyses of the project’s required measures. These required measures are outlined on pages 17-19 in the NOFO. As instructed on page 16 of the NOFO, the MCH-IOHI Consortium will develop a system to collect common metric data. Specifically, the MCH-IOHI Consortium will develop an online shared workspace for MCH-IOHI Projects that includes a password-protected portal for the collection of common metric data, displaying data results, and sharing of project activities in a trusted space.
Projects: On page 11, under State Core Function regarding the Capacity Tool(second bullet), it states “You’ll identify no less than four improvement strategies to demonstrate a linkage between state level improvements and access. For budget purposes, plan to implement this tool in project year 1.” My presumption is that we would identify these four improvement strategies during the first year, not in the application.
Yes, it is HRSA’s intent that the opportunities identified will contribute to the development of the Demonstration Projects four improvement strategies. As a common activity among the Demonstration Projects, the Consortium will assist with implementation of this tool as instructed on page 10 in the NOFO. Relevant to this post-award activity is the work plan. All applicants should acknowledge the instruction on page 23 (and repeated in the Review Criteria on page 30) that the work plan will be operational 9 months after the initial award date. There is nothing in the NOFO that prevents the approved Work Plan from changing after an award. However, as instructed on page six, the Demonstration Project award recipient will collaborate with HRSA staff to plan and develop project activities, including the development of strategies (see second bullet).
Both: What performance measures will HRSA expect the MCH-IOHI Projects and Consortium to collect?
You will collect data for the measures outlined in the NOFO on pages 17-19. And you will be responsible for collecting data in response to MCHB’s Discretionary Grants Information System (DGIS) measures noted in the Reporting section on page 36 of this NOFO. You may also report on any additional unique measures you propose to track your performance. As instructed on pages 10-11 in the NOFO, MCH-IOHI Projects will attend an MCH-IOHI Consortium-led virtual MCH-IOHI Learning Collaborative Kickoff to allow our project officer, in coordination with the MCH-IOHI Consortium, to review annual reporting requirements.
Budget
Both: We cannot find an IDC rate in this NOFO so my institution is saying they will use the federal IDC rate of 52%. Is there any chance HRSA would consider a modification specifying an 8 or 10% IDC.
The NOFO addresses indirect cost rate on page 7. If you wish to use your federally negotiated indirect cost rate, please provide a copy of your federally negotiated indirect cost rate agreement with your application. This document will not count towards the page limit. If you’ve never received a negotiated indirect cost rate, you may elect to charge a de minimis rate of 10% of modified total direct costs (MTDC). You may use this for the life of the award. If you choose this method, you must use it for all federal awards until you choose to negotiate for a rate. 45 CFR part 75 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards, which addresses the indirect cost rate, applies to all HRSA awards. HRSA’s SF-424 Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB) also addresses the indirect cost rate (see page 31).
Both: Is there a personnel percentage cap for the grant, i.e. personnel cost not to exceed 55% of total year funds?
No, the MCH-IOHI Program funding opportunity does not require a percentage cap on personnel cost.
Both: Does HRSA have guidelines for compensating persons with lived experience?
No, HRSA does not require a specific compensation for persons with lived experience. HRSA does believe persons with lived experience should be fairly compensated for their participation in project activities, such as advisory committee, training, etc. Applicants should compensate these individuals as they would any other field expert, with hourly or daily rates, honoraria, and stipends for meals, mileage, and other incidentals.
Both: Page 24 of the NOFO states “People with lived experience should be fairly compensated for their participation in project activities, such as advisory committees, training, etc.” ...but page 21 of SF-424 Application Guide states “Costs incurred by advisory councils or committees are unallowable unless authorized by law, the HHS awarding agency, or as an indirect cost where allocable to federal awards.” What is the expectation for costs incurred relevant to compensation for persons with lived experience?
As you’ve noted, in the Application Guide, costs are allowable if authorized by the HHS awarding agency. The instruction, to fairly compensate persons with lived experience (found on page 24 in the NOFO), is HRSA’s authorization to allow for this cost. HRSA is the HHS awarding agency.
Projects: Does HRSA have budget requirements for the MCH-IOHI Projects?
HRSA does expect persons with lived experience who assist with MCH-IOHI Project activities will be fairly compensated. Also, HRSA does expect the MCH-IOHI Projects to attend the in-person project meetings planned during the 4-year project period. For budget purposes, HRSA expects that you will budget for no less than four key personnel to travel to the Washington DC area for an annual 2-day, in-person meeting in project years 1 and 4.
Review criteria, on page 32 of the NOFO, specifically addresses the review of your budget, to include for the subject matter experts to consider:
- How reasonable the proposed budget is for each year of the period of performance
- Whether costs, as outlined in the budget and required resources sections, are reasonable and align with the scope of work
- Whether key staff have adequate time devoted to the project to achieve project objectives
Consortium: As host of the in-person meetings, how many attendees will the consortium need to plan (and budget) for?
For budget purposes, HRSA expects no less than 35 key staff (no less than 4 from each of the 7 MCH-IOHI projects, 1 project officer, 1 HRSA Chief Dental Officer, no less than 1 additional HRSA Program representative, and no less than 4 consortium staff) to be present at an annual 2-day, in-person meeting in project years 1 and 4. Related to this question is the consortium’s expected travel budget. HRSA expects the consortium will budget for the necessary number of personnel to host these meetings, to include travel cost if necessary. We expect this will require no less than four consortium personnel.
Consortium: Does HRSA Have budget requirement for the MCH-IOHI Consortium?
HRSA does expect persons who assist with MCH-IOHI Consortium activities with lived experience will be fairly compensated. Also, HRSA does expect the MCH-IOHI Consortium to host the annual, 2-day MCH-IOHI Project meetings, including the in-person meetings held in the DC Metro area in project years 1 and 4. The applicant can seek assistance from the project officer to hold the in-person meetings at HRSA’s Rockville location. For budget purposes, HRSA expects that you will budget to support no less than four key personnel to travel to the Washington DC area for an annual 2-day, in-person meeting in project years 1 and 4. And on pages 16-17 and 25 in the NOFO, the MCH-IOHI Consortium applicant is informed that budget planning for an annual Title V-Oral Health Performance (TV-OHP) Learning Collaborative (LC) is subject to the appropriation of funds for FY 2024. As a contingency action to ensure we can process the application and award funds appropriately, the applicant is expected to annually incentivize up to six teams to participate in a 12-month TV-OHP LC with $40,000 per team.
Review criteria, on page 32 of the NOFO, specifically addresses the review of your budget, to include for the subject matter experts to consider:
- How reasonable the proposed budget is for each year of the period of performance
- Whether costs, as outlined in the budget and required resources sections, are reasonable and align with the scope of work
- Whether key staff have adequate time devoted to the project to achieve project objectives
Attachments
Both: I was wondering if there was a work plan template that we could use or if I should use this one that I found online? Also, does the work plan have to be included in the narrative or can it just be included as an attachment?
MCHB does not have a work plan template. Given that, there is nothing in the NOFO that prevents you from using a prepared template as you have shared. You will need to ensure all details, as described in the NOFO, are evident in the work plan (see pages 10, 22-23, 25, 30-31). As for including the Work Plan in your narrative. You will see on page 23 that it is to be included as Attachment 1. It would be a courtesy to the reviewers to make known in the narrative the Work Plan is attached and to offer a brief introduction to what the reviewers will find, for instance you can describe the framework and/or outline you’ve chosen to layout the work plan so the reviewers can be prepared to review the attachment with more ease.
Projects: Regarding the HRSA 24-039 Improving Oral Health Integration Demonstration Project funding opportunity instruction on page 26, under Attachment 4, “If you include someone you have not hired yet, include a letter of commitment from that person with biographical sketch.” Does this mean that we need to have a specific individual identified and committed to being hired prior to being notified whether or not we receive the funding? Within our organization we are typically not able to initiate the hiring process until we have secured funding for a position.
No. The purpose of this statement is to ensure you have provided documentation of a commitment of any person named but not yet hired. There is nothing in the NOFO that requires you to identify the personnel who will assume key positions. I do wish to point out one requirement related to your question…that is the required work plan. As instructed on page 23, HRSA does expect your work plan to be operational 9 months after the initial award date.
Projects: My question is regarding the instruction to not use personally identifiable information (PII) when identifying the staff whose bio sketches are requested as Attachment 4. Can you clarify what is needed if we are not to name proposed staff in both Attachments 3 and 4?
HHS considers names a neutral source of PII and are not a form of personal information restricted from use in the application. The NOFO, on page 26, should read “Do not include sensitive personally identifiable information (PII) .” Please proceed with the instructions on pages 25-26, that is:
- Identify selected staff by name for the jobs described in Attachment 3.
- Include bio sketches in Attachment 4 for the named staff identified in Attachment 3, and the letters of commitment for those named for positions but not yet hired.
Both: For Attachment 4: Biographical Sketches of Key Personnel, can you confirm whether you want only a biographical sketch? A resume? Or both?
The format of the bio sketches is up to the applicant. We often find that resumes do not fit within the page limit and therefore call the document a bio sketch. Given the page limit, you may wish to focus on knowledge and skill that best suits the position.
Both: Please outline the page limit guidance within this NOFO for both projects, including which attachments count toward the page limit.
Page 9 of the NOFO states, “The total number of pages that count toward the page limit shall be no more than 60 pages when we print them. We won’t review any pages that exceed the page limit.” This instruction applies to both, the MCH-IOHI Projects and Consortium.
As instructed, the following items do not count toward the page limit:
- Standard OMB-approved forms you find in the NOFO’s workspace application package
- Abstract (standard form (SF) "Project Abstract Summary”)
- Indirect Cost Rate Agreement
- Proof of non-profit status (if it applies)
All other documents will count toward the page limit, unless noted in the NOFO (see page 25, Section IV.2.v. Attachments). Please see page 40 of the HRSA SF-424 Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB) for additional information on application page limits. Be aware that if you use an OMB-approved form that is not in the HRSA-24-039 (MCH-IOHI Projects) or HRSA-24-040 (MCH-IOHI Consortium) workspace application package, it may count toward the page limit.
Projects: Because HRSA-24-039 applicants do not need to submit Attachments 7 and 8, do we renumber the attachment for Proof of Non-Profit status?
Attachment numbers are set and cannot be revised in Grants.gov. Proof of Non-Profit Status will remain Attachment 9. An MCH-IOHI Demonstration Project application will not be considered incomplete if Attachment 7 and 8 are blank.
Both: Is Attachment 9: Proof of Non-profit Status required if we are not a non-profit?
Proof of non-profit status is required only if you are applying as a non-profit entity.
Both: Please confirm we are submitting a work plan for 4 years, as well as a budget and budget narrative for 4 years.
Yes, please submit the required work plan, budget, budget narrative, and budget SF-424A for all 4 years of the award. For more information, see page 19 of the HRSA SF-424 Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB).
Both: Do we need to use a specific template for the biographical sketch attachment?
No, the NOFO does not require a specific template for the biographical sketch attachment. Per page 26 of the NOFO, the biographical sketch should not exceed two pages in length per person. And biographical sketches are required only for the people you name as key personnel. You can find additional information about recommended narrative and attachment formatting in the HRSA SF-424 Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB), see pages 35-40.
Other
Both: Can a Project Director dedicate no more than 40% of Time and Effort to either project?
There is nothing in the NOFO that dictates the percentage of the Project Director’s time. On the other hand, the NOFO is clear in the expectations of the Project Director:
Program Requirements and Expectations -
- Page 10: represents the applicant lead organization
- Page 10: as the Alliance lead, will be responsible for the oversight of the MCH-IOHI Project
Review Criteria -
- Page 31: have the training and experience to carry out the project
- Page 32: have adequate time devoted to the project to achieve project objectives
Also, in HRSA’s Application Guide:
- Page 17: The Project Director is the person to be contacted on matters involving the application. Also, on page 39, key personnel (including the Project Director) will contribute to the programmatic development or execution of a project or program in a substantive, measurable way, whether they receive salaries or compensation under the award.
Given these instructions, HRSA expects the Project Director will be able to speak for the applicant organization on all things relevant to the award, to include funding oversight as well as programmatic issues.
Both: Does the Program Director need to be employed by the organization that is applying or can the position be administered through a partner organization?
The NOFO instruction does not mention the role of “Program Director.” I assume you speak of the “Project Director” (see page 10). As instructed, the Project Director will represent the lead organization. This lead organization must submit the Consortium application (see page 6). Relevant to this expectation is the additional instruction provided in the HRSA Application Guide. As described on page 17 of the guide, the Project Director is the person to be contacted on matters involving the application. Also, on page 39, key personnel (including the Project Director) will contribute to the programmatic development or execution of a project or program in a substantive, measurable way, whether they receive salaries or compensation under the award. With that said, HRSA expects the Project Director will be able to speak for the applicant organization on all things relevant to the award, to include funding (Grants Management) oversight as well as programmatic issues.
Both: Is the NOHI program a recurring grant? And if yes, when is the next cycle? Also, does that grant have any cost-sharing/matching requirement? And who is the program officer?
The NOHI program will not recompete. In 2024 MCHB will award 7 MCH-IOHI Demonstration Projects, which offers the opportunity to expand the integration achieved by the NOHI projects. Also, in 2024, MCHB will award one MCH-IOHI Consortium. These projects, funded under the MCH-IOHI Program, will be cooperative agreements. A cooperative agreement is like a grant in that we award money, but we are substantially involved with project activities. On pages 5-6 in the NOFO, HRSA outlines the responsibilities of the MCH-IOHI Program’s cooperative agreement recipients. As instructed on page 7 in this NOFO, the MCH-IOHI Program does not require a cost-sharing or matching requirement. And our project officer for the MCH-IOHI Program is CAPT Pamella Vodicka, who can be reached at pvodicka@hrsa.gov.
Projects: Can you give me any past or archived HRSA Opportunity Numbers of NOFOs from a related MCH-IOHI program that could help my team anticipate the new MCH-IOHI program? Since HRSA anticipates funding seven awards of $425,000 each, could you tell me if that’s over one year or over four years?
As described in the Background for this NOFO, see pages 3-4, MCHB currently funds the NOHI program which has demonstrated that with adequate funding and technical assistance, primary care providers can increase access to integrated preventive oral health services in primary care settings . The MCH-IOHI Projects (HRSA-24-039) offers the opportunity to expand the integration achieved by the NOHI projects. You can learn more about the NOHI program on MCHB’s Oral Health webpage. The anticipated award for the seven MCH-IOHI Projects will be $425,000 each, per year for the four-year project period.
Both: Could you expand on the review process and how reviewers are selected?
Pages 32-33 of the NOFO describes the Review and Selection Process. A complete and eligible application will be reviewed by an objective review committee. HRSA ensures that the objective review process is independent, efficient, effective, economical, and complies with the applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Applications are reviewed by subject matter experts knowledgeable in health and public health disciplines for which support is requested. Review findings are advisory to HRSA programs responsible for making award decisions. Reviewers are professionals with expertise and experience consistent with the HRSA mission and competitive program needs to address the availability and delivery of quality health care to all Americans.
Both: When will the successful applicant be announced? How far ahead of the July 1, 2024, project start date?
The project start date is July 1, 2024, and, if funding becomes available for this program, HRSA’s goal is to issue the award at least 15 days in advance of the project start date.
Application preparation
Both: Is there anything that prohibits an organization from applying as a lead for this opportunity but also being included on a different organization’s application as a partner organization?
No. there is nothing in the NOFO that prevents an applicant organization from applying for HRSA-24-039 and participate as a partner in a separate application submitted from a different applicant organization in the same state.
Both: Could you please let us know if it’s okay to use hyperlinks throughout the application?
Hyperlinks in the application are analogous to an attachment. Hyperlinks are addressed both in the HRSA’s Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB) (see page 35) and the NOFO (page 25)
In the Application Guide – “You must upload attachments into the application. Any hyperlinked attachments will not be reviewed/opened by HRSA.”
In the NOFO - “Reviewers will not open any attachments you link to.”
Back to the Application Guide, relevant to attachments is added instruction on page 34 (referring to the Project Narrative submitted in the application) – “This section provides a comprehensive description of all aspects of the proposed project. It should be succinct, self-explanatory, consistent with forms and attachments, and well organized so that reviewers can understand the proposed project.”
In summary, the application should stand on its own, including both Project Narrative and attachments. You will want to clearly identify within your Project Narrative the purpose/intent of the attached documents.
Projects: Where do we include the following in our application: Program Objectives and Program Overarching Expectations, specifically (as listed on page 10 in the NOFO): Health Equity Approach, Performance Measures/QI, Forming an Alliance, Participating in a Consortium-led Learning Collaborative.
On page 22 in NOFO, you will find the applicant’s response to Program Objectives should be addressed in the Approach section of the Project Narrative. As for the overarching expectations: Health equity, at the very least, should be addressed in the Approach section of your Project Narrative (as instructed on page 22); Performance Measures/QI should be addressed in the Evaluation and Technical Support Capacity section (see page 23); and forming an Alliance, at the very least, should be addressed in the Organizational Information section (see page 20). As for participating in a Consortium-led Learning Collaborative, collaboration with all MCH-IOHI Demonstration Projects and the National Consortium are an expectation of this award (see page 6). This expectation is described throughout the Program Requirements and Expectations (beginning on page 9). Acknowledging this expectation, at the very least, should be addressed in the Approach section of your Project Narrative (see page 22, see first bullet).
BOTH: We are not finding guidance regarding formatting (font, font size, and spacing) in the NOFO for HRSA-24-039. Could you please provide us with some guidance?
Please see page iii of the NOFO, bottom of the page. Here you will see the instruction to read both the NOFO and the HRSA Application Guide (PDF - 680 KB). You will find formatting addressed on page 35 in the guide.
Both: How do I resolve technical errors while preparing or submitting my application in Grants.gov? What software is needed to submit an application in Grants.gov?
For assistance with submitting the application in Grants.gov, contact Grants.gov 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, excluding federal holidays at:
- Grants.gov Contact Center Telephone: 1-800-518-4726
- Email: support@grants.gov
Both: What needs to be completed prior to submission of the award application?
An applicant’s SAM.gov and Grants.gov registrations and passwords must be current in order to submit an application to HRSA. Registrations in all systems may take up to one month to complete, so do not wait to activate or update accounts in these two systems. Please note that a Unique Entity ID (UEI) is required to apply for this funding. You must register in the SAM.gov to receive your UEI. You cannot use a DUNS number to apply. Learn more about the DUNS to UEI transition.