Critical Issue Grant NOFO

Application and Submission Instructions

All materials must be submitted through the USDA NIFA Regional IPM Centers Grant Management System to be eligible for review. Applicants must enter project narrative text directly into Grant Management System text boxes and upload required forms as PDF or Excel files.

Pre-Submission Preparation

1. Access the Grant Management System, and log in or create an account.
2. Click Start a new grant proposal, then under the North Central region’s 2027 North Central IPM Center – Critical Issue Grant, click the Begin a new proposal button.
3. Download required templates found in the Grant Management System:
   • Cover and Assurances Form
   • Budget Worksheet
   • Budget Narrative
   • Conflict of Interest Form

Proposal Questions

Input the following into the online text and selection fields within the Grant Management System:

General Information

• Project Type (Critical Issue)
• Project Abstract (500-word limit): A plain-language summary of the core problem or opportunity, primary objectives, proposed approach, and expected impact.
• NCIPMC priorities addressed.
• All other general questions: lead state and organization, cooperating states, funding requested, project discipline, performance dates, target audience(s) or end users, commodities, target organism(s), practices, benefits and impacts, outreach methods.

Key Personnel

Critical Issue Project Narrative

Organize your Project Narrative using the following outline.

Problem and Justification (800-word limit)

Describe the stakeholder-identified pest management problem, need, or opportunity the Critical Issue project will address and explain why it warrants a timely response. Include:

• Need and significance: Describe the situation facing stakeholders and who or what is affected. Identify the important gaps in information, management, decision-making, IPM adoption or implementation, or other areas the project will address. Provide relevant information or evidence demonstrating the importance of the problem, need, or opportunity, including economic, environmental, agricultural, human health, or other impacts when appropriate. Evidence may include research findings, evaluation findings, stakeholder input, or practice- or experience-based knowledge. Describe how the need was identified or validated, including how stakeholders or intended audiences were engaged in identifying the problem and/or developing the proposed response.
• Timeliness and need for the proposed work: Explain why the issue should be addressed now and how the proposed approach responds to the identified need. Describe important changes, emerging circumstances, information or management gaps, or other factors that make the proposed work timely. Explain what the proposed project can accomplish within the one-year funding period and why Critical Issue funding is appropriate.
• Regional relevance: Describe the relevance of the issue and proposed work to the North Central region. Explain how the results, approaches, information, or resources developed through the project could benefit stakeholders or be applicable beyond a single location. When applicable, identify existing regional or national IPM infrastructure relevant to the proposed work—such as the Crop Protection Network and its decision-support resources, EDDMapS, Pest Management Strategic Plans (PMSPs), Crop Profiles, and other Center-supported networks, data systems, communication platforms, and resources—and explain how the project will build upon, contribute to, or complement those efforts. If existing infrastructure cannot adequately address the identified need, briefly explain the gap.
• Anticipated benefit: Describe what the project will make possible or improve beyond current conditions. Explain how the proposed work will benefit identified stakeholders or intended audiences and contribute to improved IPM information, decision-making, capacity, implementation, adoption, or management.
• Alignment with priorities: Explain how the project addresses one or more NCIPMC priority areas and supports relevant USDA NIFA priorities.

Critical Issue Project Goal, Objectives, and Evaluation

• Goal (40-word limit): State the proposed project’s overall goal. The goal is a broad statement of purpose or long-term change (impact) that the proposed project seeks to advance. It should be grounded in and logically flow from the proposed project context and rationale described in the preceding section.
• Objectives: Proposals should include 1–3 objectives appropriate to the available funding and one-year project period. Objectives should describe the primary intended change or result and identify the stakeholders, audiences, organizations, or systems expected to benefit. Objectives should be specific, achievable, and measurable.

For each objective, provide:

• • Inputs: Identify the key resources, expertise, partnerships, data, existing tools or technologies, or other assets that will be used to accomplish the objective.
  • Activities: Describe the specific activities that will be undertaken to accomplish this objective. Examples may include mapping pest insects, diseases, or weeds, and researching best management practices or new IPM technologies. Activities should be relevant and achievable within the one-year project period.
  • Outputs: Describe the immediate, measurable products, services, participation, or reach that are expected to result from implementing the activities for this objective. Specify an anticipated number, type, or scope – for example trials or experiments completed; samples or sites monitored; management tactics or technologies tested; datasets, maps, tools, or educational resources developed; or outreach activities conducted and participants reached.
  • Outcomes: Please list the expected short- and medium-term outcomes for this objective.
    • Short-term outcomes: Short-term outcomes are the changes expected to occur as a direct result of implementing project activities and producing outputs. Short-term outcomes may include changes in knowledge, attitudes, skills, awareness, aspirations, confidence, capacity, or access to information or resources. What short-term changes are expected to result from activities and outputs for this objective? Identify who or what is expected to experience each change and, when feasible, the anticipated degree of change and timeframe.
    • Medium-term outcomes: Medium-term outcomes are the changes in actions expected to occur as targeted individuals, groups, organizations, communities, or systems apply or act upon the expected short-term changes. Medium-term outcomes may include changes in behaviors; practices; decision-making; policy adoption or implementation; adoption or use of new strategies or technologies; collaboration; or organizational performance or practices. What medium-term changes are expected to develop from the short-term outcomes for this objective? Identify who or what is expected to experience each change and, when feasible, the anticipated degree of change and timeframe.

• Potential Long-Term Outcomes for all objectives (150-word limit): Long-term outcomes are changes in social, economic, health, environmental, organizational, or system-level conditions. Long-term outcomes generally occur beyond the one-year project period and build on the achievement of short-term and medium-term outcomes. Briefly identify the broader, long-term change to which the proposed project may contribute and explain how it logically builds on the anticipated short- and medium-term outcomes across the project’s objectives. We do not expect you to achieve or measure the identified long-term outcome during the project period.

• Evaluation of all objectives (350-word limit): How will you document and assess the proposed implementation and anticipated results across all objectives?  Describe an evaluation approach that is aligned with the project objectives and expected outcomes (results) and is appropriate and feasible given the project’s scope, duration, and available resources.
  • Key evaluation questions: What key question(s)will the evaluation address? Explain how the evaluation questions relate to the project objectives and expected outcomes.
  • Data sources: From whom or where will the evaluation data be obtained/collected? Examples may include research or field trial data; monitoring, survey, or diagnostic data; project records; participants or intended users; and collaborating stakeholders or organizations.
  • Data collection methods: How will the evaluation data be collected? Examples may include field or laboratory measurements; monitoring or sampling; surveys or questionnaires; interviews or discussions; observation; participant or usage tracking; and review of project records or products.
  • Evaluation results use and reporting: How will the evaluation findings be used to guide project implementation, learning, improvement, or decision-making? How will the evaluation findings be communicated – for example, through briefings, interim or progress reports, a final report, or an impact report?

Proposal Attachments

Upload documents to their respective fields:

• Cover and Assurances Form (PDF): Signed by an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR).
• Budget Worksheet (Excel): Submit the completed Excel budget template using the following guidelines:
  • Indirect Cost Cap: Indirect costs cannot exceed 30% of Total Federal Funds (42.857% of direct costs) or your institutional rate—whichever is lower.

  • Sub-Award Requirements: If your project includes sub-awards to other institutions, you must submit:

    • An overall budget for the lead project that reflects total costs (including all sub-awards).

    • Individual itemized budget breakdowns for each participating institution.

  • Lead Institution Share: It is recommended that the lead institution request at least 50% of the total project budget

• Budget Narrative (PDF): Describe proposed expenditures for each line item. If the project has a sub-award, you will submit a budget narrative for that portion as well.
• Letters of Support (PDF): Letters from participating stakeholders or collaborating organizations.
• Current and Pending Support Forms (PDF): Senior/Key Personnel must generate and export their Current and Pending Support forms via SciENcv. Must list this grant as “Pending.”
• Conflict of Interest Form (PDF): Separate form for each Senior/Key Personnel.
• Literature Cited (PDF): List only publications cited in the proposal.

Please note: USDA requires the use of the Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae (SciENcv) system to generate Common Forms for the Current and Pending (Other) Support documents. Free-form versions of these documents will not be accepted. SciENcv produces USDA-compliant Common Forms that must be certified and submitted as PDF attachments with the application. Please reference the USDA NIFA Grants Application Guide for eRA Commons and SciENcv instructions.