Supporting HIV care through education and innovation

2012 Part A Funding Opportunity Announcement Technical Assistance Call

2012 Part A Funding Opportunity Announcement Technical Assistance Call

August 21, 2012
HRSA HIV/AIDS Bureau

Description

See Grants.gov (HIV Care Program Part A HIV Emergency Relief Grant Program, HRSA-13-155) for application information.

View Webcast Recording (Adobe Connect)

Q&A Transcript

Question 1:  Is prior approval required for HIV testing under EIS?

Answer:  Yes, prior approval is required in order to fund HIV testing under EIS.  Applicants must submit a request via the EHB that documents EIS funds will supplement and not supplant existing funds for HIV testing.                

Question 2:  There seems to be an inconsistency between the question on Page 21 (2a) in the guidance and the review criteria on Page 44.  The FOA/guidance asks for a description of the activities but the review criteria requires the grantee to describe the associated timeline and responsible party for each action, in addition to providing a description of the respective activities.  Please clarify.   

Answer:  In the Plan Section of EIIHA, 2) B. Plan (page 22), applicants are asked in (2)(b) to describe the respective activities to address Cultural Challenges that obstruct awareness of HIV status, and include the timeline(s) and responsible parties for each activity. 

Question 3:  Applicants are asked to describe the role of Outreach in the promotion of routine HIV screening; however there is no mention of Outreach in the review criterion of Page 45.  Please clarify.

Answer:  Applicants should describe their essential activities.  The guidance may ask the applicant to provide information that helps reviewers have a broader understanding of the applicant’s program.  As a result, there is not always a 100% direct cross-walk between the narrative and criteria; it is incumbent upon applicants to “paint a picture” of their program in response to the guidance requirements.   ORC reviewers are made aware of this expectation.      

Question 4:  In the “Identifying” portion of the EIIHA section, the grantee is asked to describe how they will coordinate with other Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program Parts.  The review criterion on only asks grantees to discuss Part B.  Please clarify. 

Answer:  Grantee should discuss coordination among all Ryan White Program Parts, but we do have an interest in Part B given the common legislative requirements for both programs. 

Question 5:  The FOA asks grantees to provide a list of planned services that meets the 75% core medical services requirement regardless of whether the applicant has received or intends to apply for a core medical services waiver.  Explain how the grantee is to respond if they are requesting a waiver.   

Answer:  Grantees who have received or intend to apply for a core medical services waiver will submit a planned services table that addresses the 75% core medical services requirement.  In addition, if those services are different from the table that reflects compliance with the 75% core medical services requirement, the grantee must also submit a table that reflects the results of the priority setting and resource allocation process.  This means that some grantees will be submitting two planned services tables.  The grantee will submit one table that reflects the results of the P & A process (without the waiver) and one table that is consistent with the waiver request. 

Question 6:  On page iii, the FOA indicates that the most recent service definitions can be found at a web link that takes the reader to the RSR instruction manual for 2010.  There have been updates.  What is the link with the most recent definitions?

Answer:  The most recent service definitions can be found in the RSR Instruction Manual.  The manual has been updated for 2011 and we’ll be updating it again, for 2012, probably by the end of this summer. 

The correct link is: http://hab.hrsa.gov/manageyourgrant/files/hab2011rsrinstrmanual.pdf   

Question 7:  Table 5 asks grantees to report on the availability of public funding for HIV/AIDS related care services from Federal, State and Local sources.  Please clarify how HRSA defines the difference between “Other Community-Based Primary Medical Care” that differs from those under “Ambulatory/Outpatient Medical Care”.    

Answer:  Section 1) C. Impact of Part A Funding:  Funding Mechanisms requires applicants to submit, in Table 5, a report on the availability of public funding for HIV/AIDS related care services from Federal, State and Local sources.  A list of service categories is provided.  Ambulatory/Outpatient Medical Care services that are not provided in a community based setting may be listed in category (a), Ambulatory/Outpatient Medical Care.  Medical services provided in a community based setting may be listed in category (d), “Other Outpatient/Community Based Primary Medical Care Services” category. 

Question 8:  In the Grantee Accountability Section, grantees are requested to provide information about planned site visits for FY 2013.  Page 50 of the review criteria requests the same data from FY 2012.  Which date is correct? 

Answer:  The guidance is correct; there is an error in the review criteria.  Grantees should provide information on planned site visits for FY 2013.

Question 9:  Are there any notable changes in the EIIHA requirements for FY 2013? 

Answer:  The only thing that is different/new in FY2013 FOA’s EIIHA section is we are asking the grantee to describe the progress made.  During the past two years, we mainly asked about “their plan”.

Question 10:  The list of categories provided on the template for “Other Funding” did not include EIS and case management. Where should these items be reported?

Answer:  Our recommendation is to add another line to the form to capture other funding streams.

Question 11:  FOA indicates that we must submit one-year budgets for each subsequent budget year in the project period. How does this apply to Part A since we only have a one-year project period?

Answer:  You are to provide a full one-year budget along with your budget narrative. That is template language in the FOA that pertains to other programs.

Question 12:  EHB does not have a specific portal to submit a prior approval for EIS. How do we submit this request?

Answer:  In the prior approval drop down list, select “Other” and title it EIS HIV Testing Funding Request. Your Project Officer will receive notification that the request was submitted and will review it for approval.

Question 13:  Do we only need to submit resumes for new staff positions? Are biographical sketches in the staffing plan for all current staff sufficient?

Answer:  Yes, you are correct. You only need to submit resumes for new staff. Biographical sketches for current staff are sufficient.

Question 14:  Can we use the HIV testing and awareness data that we submitted in the most recent FY 11 Progress Report which covered the period of March – February? Or do I have to ask the State to re-run the data based on the calendar year as requested in the FOA?

Answer:  You can use the data that you already have. We are currently looking at our progress report to ensure that we are not asking for duplicate data in the application in future years.

Question 15:  Who should answer question 5D on page 39 – planning and resources for newly designated TGA?

Answer:   An instruction box was left off. Our intention is that 5C would be for Baton Rouge, LA and Charlotte, NC and 5D for Columbus, OH.

Question 16:  On page 12, the description under Other for the budget states that in some cases rent and utilities fall under this category if they are not included in an approved indirect cost rate. In the past, we received guidance that rent and utilities must be included in Administration and are subject to the 10% cap. Does this still apply?

Answer:  It still applies. If you have a specific question, call your project officer and they will work through any possible exceptions to that requirement with you.

Question 17:  Regarding 4C Grantee Accountability, we will not have data regarding site visit findings at the time of the application because our EMA site visits are scheduled to take place September through February. Should we reference the previous year’s findings or do we just identify that we plan to conduct site visits during the grant year?

Answer:  Our recommendation is that you include information on any completed site visit that you made by the time you submit your application. However, if you haven’t, you should discuss your site visit work plan and any particular concerns that you have regarding program implementation of your providers. Your response can be a combination of past findings as well as your upcoming plan.

Question 18:  Is it expected that the grantee identify specific amounts of the unallowable charges or is it acceptable to identify that all unallowable charges identified during program monitoring will be recouped prior to the end of the grant year?

Answer:  Our recommendation is that you provide specific data whenever possible. If there are unallowable charges connected or tied to a specific service category or provider, you need to be able to document that information. However, if you do not have that information at the time of the application, then you should provide the cleanest information you have and an explanation for any data you don’t have. Remember, you should always try to provide specific data.

Question 19:  Can we integrate service categories into the same table as long as we label what is MAI for the Implementation Plan 2013? Or do you want two separate tables, one for Part A and one for MAI?

Answer:  We would prefer that you integrate MAI into your Implementation Plan, but clearly label it.

Question 20:  Sometimes at the local level we have trouble getting travel approved. HRSA indicated on the last TA call that a letter would be sent out stating that travel to the AGM is mandatory for grantees. Will you be sending out this letter?

Answer:  We will commit to getting a letter out regarding mandatory participation in the Ryan White 2012 Grantee Meeting to all of our contacts in the near future.

Question 21:  Should testing data for EIIHA be reported for the Chicago EMA or just the city of Chicago?

Answer:  Data should include the entire EMA.

Question 22:  What does coordination mean with other Ryan White Parts?

Answer:  For example, if you have standing meetings with other Part C funded or prevention funded entities, having EIIHA as an agenda item to discuss and share what’s being done by each other and opportunities to work together is a form of coordination and collaboration.

Question 23:  Is the page limit 90 or 100 pages?

The HRSA Office of Federal Assistance Management has approved a 100 page limit for this FOA.

View Off-Site:

Adobe Connect Recording

Add a Comment

Log in or register to post comments