Frequently Asked Questions
- Funding and Budget
- Application Process
- Review Process
- Recipient Activities: Basic Component
- Recipient Activities: Enhanced Component
Is this Program funded with Affordable Care Act dollars?
No. This Program relies on budget authority granted through Congress.
In 2009, our state’s oral health program was eliminated due to budget cuts. Would this funding opportunity announcement allow our state to re-build its oral health capacity?
Yes. The state through its health department or bona fide agent would be eligible for Component 1 to rebuild the basic capacity of the oral health program.
What is the time period this FOA covers?
This Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA), DP13-1307, covers a 5 year project period from 2013 to 2018. This FOA covers annual funding periods of 12 months. Grantees will submit a Continuation Application annually to request funding for the following 12 month period.
We were a grantee for FOA#3022, are we eligible to apply for Component 1?
No, only states that did not receive funding for previous oral health FOA’s (CDC PA 1046, CDC PA 03022, CDC-RFA-DP08-802, and CDC-RFA-DP10-1012) are eligible to apply for Component 1.
In my state, all Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)/Memoranda of Agreement (MOA) are legally binding. Is there flexibility to submit a letter instead of an MOU/MOA?
Yes. Applicants may submit a letter of commitment in lieu of an MOU/MOA to comply with the FOA.
Is an evaluation plan required for this FOA?
Applicants must provide an evaluation plan in the narrative.
What does the term “health systems” mean in the FOA?
The health systems referenced in the FOA are health care delivery organizations and may include health maintenance organizations (HMOs), Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), Rural Health Centers (RHCs) and other clinical groups operating within the state.
Are the terms used in the logic model the same as terms used in the FOA?
All terms used in the logic model correspond to the FOA and are used and explained throughout the FOA description (approach and program strategy sections). If there is a particular term that is not clear, please follow up with a separate question.
Will there continue to be strong partnerships with states on evaluation activities and how will this be coordinated through this funding opportunity?
Yes, CDC will work closely with states by providing ongoing evaluation technical assistance on all aspects of evaluation including operationalizing the performance measures, developing state-level evaluation plans, and conducting the national evaluation.
Is a state that is not a previous CDC grantee eligible to apply for Component 2? If so, must all seven strategies of Component 1 be fully implemented?
All states and the District of Columbia are eligible to apply for Component 2. All seven strategies of Component 1 do not need to be fully implemented. In the application Background section, applicants should address how and to what extent the state has met Component 1 performance measures (see page 33 of the FOA). The applicant should show how their basic capacity is consistent with applying for Component 2 in the Organizational Capacity section (see page 34-35 of the FOA).
We are a nonprofit organization that provides preventive dental care to economically disadvantaged children and adults with developmental disabilities. Are we eligible to apply for this prevention program?
No, eligibility is limited to states and the District of Columbia or their bona fide agent.
The FOA indicates that between 3 to 5 states will be funded for Component 1. How many states total are eligible for Component 1 consideration? Thank you.
Twenty-eight states were not previously funded by CDC for state oral disease prevention programs and are eligible to apply for Component 1. Component 1 targets states that have 4 or less of the 7 basic capacity strategies in Component 1.
I am a professor of public health and want to submit a proposal for an oral cancer prevention program. Would we be eligible to apply?
No, universities are not eligible. Eligibility is limited to states and the District of Columbia or their bona fide agent.
What states have previously been funded that cannot apply for component one?
States that were awarded cooperative agreements under CDC PA 1046, CDC PA 03022, CDC-RFA-DP08-802, and CDC-RFA-DP10-1012 are as follows: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Who is eligible to apply for funding?
All 50 states and the District of Columbia Health Departments or their bona fide agent are eligible to apply for funding. State Health Departments receiving CDC funds under CDC PA 1046, CDC PA 03022, CDC-RFA-DP08-802, and CDC-RFA-DP10-1012 are not eligible for Component 1.
Are counties or non-governmental organizations eligible to apply and qualify for funding in this particular FOA?
No. Eligibility is limited to state health departments or their bona fide agent.
For the budget information sheets in the Grants Application Package/SF424A there is no budget category for Consultants. Should "Consultants" be included under "Contractual"?
Yes, the SF424A “Contractual” line (line f) should display the total from both the “Consultants Costs” and “Contractual Costs” budget lines from the itemized Budget Narrative.
Question regarding SF-424A "Project Abstract Summary" page. Is the length of the proposed project 12 months? And do we just complete the Federal Share requested for Year 1?
For the SF-424 and SF-424A forms, the Project Period is July 31, 2013 to July 30, 2018. In Box 18 of the 424 and in Section A, Budget Summary, Federal Share column (column (e) under New or Revised Budget) of the 424A, the amount is your budget request for Grant Year 1. In Section E, Budget Estimates of Federal Funds Needed for Balance of the Project, of the 424A form, you will indicate the estimated total amount for years 2 to 5. It is recommended to use the same level of total funding being requested for Year 1. You do not need an itemized budget except for Grant Year 1. See the SF424 Instructions that have been added to the General Information page of the FOA web site.
If we are planning to use Technical Assistance from ASTDD for some of the strategy areas for a component 1 application, is the state contribution to cost-sharing allowable in the budget and would that go under "consultant costs" or "Contractual"?
This is an allowable cost and would be placed under “Consultant Costs“ consistent with the Budget Preparation Guidelines.
We are not a current CDC grantee and had planned to apply for Component 1. However, I am unclear from a previous Q&A if a sealant coordinator can be supported with Component 1 - or only as part of Component 2?
A sealant program coordinator is considered Component 2.
Are there limits on budgeting for equipment, such as sealant equipment or computers for epidemiology and surveillance support?
The funding announcement allows the purchase of fluoridation equipment. In Government budget guidelines, equipment is an item that costs at least $5,000. As specified on page 41 of the funding announcement, in most cases awardees may not use CDC funds for purchase of furniture or equipment. Items such as portable dental units or computer s that cost less than $5,000 can be budgeted under the Supplies line item.
Would purchase of the portable dental units be allowed, even though funds for clinical care would not be allowed?
Clinical care is paying for direct health services or paying health providers to provide clinical services, such as sealants.
We plan to support communities with funding for fluoridation equipment. Would this be budgeted as equipment or as contractual?
These should be budgeted under contractual. The required elements for the contracts as shown in the budget guidelines should be furnished in the budget request.
For component 2, If we have a fluoridation coordinator and sealant coordinator, where does the Dental Director funding fit in the budget in their supporting the work of the sealant coordinator and fluoridation coordinator? How much of their time can be budgeted towards Component 2?
Generally, the Dental Director is considered Component 1 program leadership. If the Dental Director is serving part-time in a Component 2 role, e.g., fluoridation coordinator, then that portion of the salary could be designated as Component 2.
Is a program evaluator considered Component 1 or 2 in the budget?
The Evaluator is part of Component 1.
If we are applying for Component 2, how do we indicate in the budget how we are allocating expenses to Component 1 and Component 2?
You can indicate through a “(Comp1) or (C1)” or “(Comp2) or (C2)” for the budget item, or give a summary table at the end of the budget showing how you are designating the budget items.
If we are losing funding for a currently-funded staff position, can the position be funded under this new award?
CDC funding is not allowed to be used to supplant existing funds being used for that staff person, i.e., just shifting funds for a different purpose. However, if that funding Is no longer available, the staff person may be funded to do activities appropriate for this FOA.
Do we submit a budget for the all 5 years or just Year 1?
The budget should be for the first budget year. Each additional budget year you will submit a continuation application with a proposed budget for that year.
Because we no longer have a dental health program, oral health (OH) planning/surveillance responsibilities have been delegated to the Maternal Child Health (MCH) program. Currently, we have a CDC Epidemiology assignee that working on oral health. He is currently paid through our Title V MCH Block? Could we pay for a percentage of his salary/fringe using this grant?
CDC funds may be used for oral health epidemiologic support. CDC funds should not be used to supplant existing funding, but can be used to increase the level of effort or to replace funding that has been discontinued.
Is all staffing that was listed in PA DP08-802 considered only to be part of component 1 (e.g., dental director, 0.5 FTE program coordinator, 0.5 FTE epidemiologist, 0.5 dental sealant program coordinator, 0.5 water fluoridation engineer/coordinator/specialist, 0.25 health education/communication)? For example if previous funding did not support a 0.5 FTE sealant coordinator or 0.5 FTE epidemiologist could it be considered part of new funding for component 2 for support of such positions if it is tied in with the program expansions for implementation?
The sealant program coordinator and fluoridation coordinator would be considered as Component 2. The other staff would be considered as Component 1, although the health education effort could be Component 2 if directed towards one of the Component 2 strategies.
Is travel for the grantee meeting and NOHC considered as part of the maintenance of component 1 budget in component 2 applications (e.g., part of the 50% limitation for maintaining component 1)? How many meetings per project year do you expect?
Travel would align with the traveling staff’s responsibilities under either Component 1 or Component 2. There are two planned grantee meetings, one in November 2013 and one in 2018.
To which 50% of a Component 2 budget should state indirect be charged?
Indirect costs (IDC) would be allocated based on the appropriate applicable portion of each Component.
Are there budget limits on in-state and out-of-state travel? What happens if the applicant cannot travel to the required meetings listed in the budget section?
There is no ceiling limit on travel, provided it is adequately justified. There is adequate funding available in the award to include travel for grantee meetings. The budget is not part of the evaluation criteria of the review of the application.
When developing the budget for Component 2, should staff supporting interventions such as school-based sealant programs and community water fluoridation be considered as a Component 2 activity, or do their salaries and expenses fall under the 50% of the state’s budget to maintain Component 1 activities?
Staff and related expenses that support interventions such as school-based sealant programs and community water fluoridation are counted towards Component 2 in the budget.
The application states that CDC will not fund clinical care. Can you give me an example of what CDC would fund with regard to school-based sealant activities?
CDC does not provide assistance for direct clinical services, such as for a practitioner’s time to apply a sealant or other clinical services. CDC funds should preferably be used to support systems level approaches. CDC funds may be used for a state sealant coordinator, to identify eligible schools; to coordinate with school officials and other school-based sealant programs; to document sealant delivery and cost savings; and to leverage additional funding for school based sealant programs. Other examples include: in-state travel for program staff, local sealant coordinator, and portable sealant program supplies. For more examples, see strategy table on pages 16 and 17 of the funding announcement. Refer to the budget information on page 38-39 of the announcement and the Budget Guidelines found at the FOA website and at http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/foamain.shtm. Additional information can be found at: http://www.cdc.gov/about/business/funding.htm and at http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/docs/FinancialReferenceGuide.pdf [PDF–662K].
Are the minimum and maximum anticipated funding amounts listed in the FOA for Year 1 of the project period?
Yes, the minimum and maximum anticipated funding amounts listed are for Year 1 of the project period.
Can states request funding that is greater than the ceiling for Component 1 or 2?
States are not allowed to exceed the ceiling awards specified in the FOA for either Component 1 or 2.
Is direct assistance (DA) for on-site personnel available through this FOA?
Yes. If an applicant’s request for on-site personnel to provide technical assistance is approved as a part of their award, CDC may reduce the amount of funding provided to the organization as a part of their award. The amount by which the award is reduced to provide DA shall be deemed as part of the award and shall be deemed to have been paid to the organization, the awardee. For example, this means that if you receive a full-time epidemiologist assignee to your state program and the value of this assignee is $80,000, the award would be reduced by $80,000.
Can the cost of SAS be included in the budget as Direct Assistance? If so, what is the current cost of a SAS license?
Yes. For 2013, the cost is $1,235 per SAS license. The cost per license will change from year to year. If an organization’s request for direct assistance (DA) is approved as a part of their award, CDC may reduce the amount of funding provided to the organization as a part of their award. The amount by which the award is reduced to provide DA shall be deemed as part of the award and shall be deemed to have been paid to the organization, the awardee.
Should travel costs for required meetings be included in the budget?
Yes, travel costs for required meetings should be included in the budget.
Is the budget included as part of the total page limit for applications? Is there a page limit specific to the budget narrative?
The budget is not a part of the total project narrative page limit. There is no page limit for the budget narrative.
Can funds be used toward staff salaries?
Yes, funds in both Component 1 and Component 2 can be used to support positions described in the funding opportunity.
What portion of Component 2 funding can be used to maintain capacity for collective impact?
Up to 50% of the funding in Component 2 can be used for this purpose. The remainder is to be spent on evidence-based preventive interventions.
Is a match required?
Matching funds are not required.
Can you elaborate on the required response for PART II, D 13 titled Tobacco and Nutritional Policies? Is this for informational purposes only, or is a response required? If a response is required, please describe the content and format of the response.
While CDC is encouraging awardees to consider implementation of the tobacco and nutrition policies, you are not required to address them in your project narrative. You will not be evaluated or scored on whether you choose to participate in these optional policies.
For Component 1 application, do we need to decide in the application which 2 additional focus areas will be chosen for evaluation or could that be determined as part of Year 1 activities? Are focus areas the same as 7 strategies? Is it possible in the narrative to provide general evaluation questions/approaches for each of the 7 strategies?
Applicants should propose three possible focus areas for their three focused evaluations to be accomplished during the 5-year Project Period. These may be changed or refined during the first year of the cooperative agreement as described on page 37 of the funding announcement. The focus area for each evaluation should be one of the strategies or a portion of a strategy. Strategy 2 of Component 1, Partnerships/Collaborations, is a required focus area.
All Awardees will report on applicable performance measures, as shown in the tables on pages 10-19 of the funding announcement, for the strategies in their work plan. You do not need to provide general evaluation questions/approaches for each of the seven strategies, but you should address your strategy for performance measurement. Applicants may propose additional performance measures as described on pages 22-23 of the funding announcement.
On the Assurances and Certifications forms, it will not allow me to type in any information. Should I just print them out and hand write our information, i.e. title, applicant organization, etc.?
Yes, print them out and scan after signature.
Under Organizational Capacity of Awardees to execute the Approach, I have combined i and ii. Is this allowed or do you require specific headings and separate sections for the Organizational Capacity Statement and the Project Management sections?
Yes, that would be acceptable.
In order for the work plan to include SMART annual objectives more than one annual objective needs to be developed for most of the Component 2 Strategies. Not allowing for more than one objective, as the work plan template implies, would lead to broad objective statements, i.e., not SMART, to be inclusive enough for all activities to fall under. Therefore, can strategies have more than one annual objective, e.g., Component 2 Strategy 6, if those objectives are SMART and are directly related to annual activities that do not fall under one objective?
The applicant can propose more than one annual objective for each strategy. The applicant will need to remain cognizant of the page limitation.
In order to maximize space in the work plan, can we remove the lines in the template “List all that apply (Choose from the list provided in Appendix A)” and “Select all that apply”?
Yes, that would be acceptable.
Do attachments like CVs and organization charts count towards the project narrative page limit?
The attachments do not count towards the project narrative page limit.
Component 2 is one application. Where would maintenance of Component 1 be shown, in the project narrative, work plan, or budget?
Maintenance of Component 1 would be described in the project narrative and work plan. It could also be part of budget, if you will be using some of the budget for Component 1 activities.
Is there a page limits for attachments or the number of letters of support? Do we need to submit a logic model and where does it go?
There is no page limit on attachments or letters of support, but use your judgment in including key partners. A logic model is not required in the application.
Does the Evaluation Plan go in the Project Narrative or in the Work Plan?
Both. The Project Narrative would be descriptive of your evaluation focus areas, questions, data collection methods, use of findings, and how you will involve stakeholders, etc., as shown in the FOA on pages 36-37. Evaluation is also a strategy; in the work plan for year 1 and the narrative for year 2-5, you should include objectives and the activities in the Work plan under Component 1 Strategy 4, Build evaluation capacity. The project narrative describes your approach, while the work plan is the work you plan to do.
Should the applicant use the sample work plan template that is referenced in the Announcement and is available as a resource on the funding opportunity announcement website?
We encourage applicants to use this template, but it is not required. We suggest you write concisely to stay within page limits.
Some of the work plan template fields are showing as blue italics font. Should this be changed to black plain font?
Yes, you may change them to black plain font.
Does CDC suggest or provide examples of partnerships?
Yes, please review list of potential partners listed on page 11, 20, and 21 of the announcement.
If applying for the Component 2, do separate applications need to be submitted for basic capacity and the evidence-based preventive interventions?
States applying for Component 2 are expected to submit one application that includes both the basic capacity and their evidence-based preventive interventions.
Does the 18-page limit for the Project Narrative include the work plan or the evaluation plan, or are they separate attachments on www.grants.gov ?
The 18-page limit for the project narrative should include a description of the evaluation plan; the work plan is a separate attachment with a 25-page limit. The work plan is not included in the page count of the project narrative.
Is the Background section required as part of the Project Narrative?
Yes, the background section is required as part of the Project Narrative.
The project narrative does not include a section for burden of oral disease information. Does the FOA only require burden information for specific target populations?
Applicants may include data used to identify target populations as part of the program strategy description in the project narrative.
What are the bolded headers that should be included in the section 10 Project Narrative (pg. 33)?
The project narrative must include all bolded headers noted in section 10, Project Narrative, including those for Background, Approach, Purpose, Outcomes, Program Strategy, Organizational Capacity, Project Management, Evaluation and Performance Measurement.
For the work plan portion of the project narrative, is a brief summary of the work plan with direction to the separate, more descriptive work plan document acceptable?
Yes, a brief summary of the work plan portion for the project narrative is acceptable. It is expected that the details of the work plan be delineated in the accompanying Work Plan Template.
For project management, can applicants upload both CVs and organizational charts in www.grants.gov?
Yes, both can supplement the project management narrative. Applicants should name files “CVs/Resumes” and “Organizational Charts” and upload these to www.grants.gov.
Can states delete unnecessary text from the work plan templates to save space (ex: remove settings not applicable to a given intervention)?
No, applicants may not delete unnecessary text from the work plan template for Component 1. For Component 2, applicants may delete Component 2 work plan pages for evidence-based preventive interventions they choose not to work on during the Project Period.
Is there a copy of the Logic Model that states can work with to complete the application?
The logic model can be found on page 8 of the FOA and on the FOA website, www.cdc.gov/OralHealth/foa/state-oral-disease-prevention-program.htm.
Both Component 1 and Component 2 work plan templates include a column for a “Key Contributing Partner Assigned.” Can more than one partner be listed?
Applicants may enter more than one partner, but should limit their entries to important, or “key,” contributing partners.
Can applicants determine their own target timelines for the Component 1 and Component 2 work plans, to coincide with state strategic plans or existing initiatives? Or should all target timelines be one year?
Yes, timelines are individually determined. States will report progress on measures annually.
Do we include “Organizational Capacity of Awardees to Execute Approach” in the project narrative or in separate attachments of CVs and organizational charts?
“Organizational Capacity of Awardees to Execute Approach” should be described in the 18-page project narrative. Supporting documentation, specifically CVs/resumes and organizational charts should be attachments.
Are the Assurances and Certifications documents required?
Yes. All applicants are required to sign and submit CDC Assurances and Certifications that can be found on the CDC Web site at the following Internet address: http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/foamain.shtm. Applicants must name this file CDC Assurances and Certifications” and upload as a PDF on www.grants.gov.
Do applicants need to submit a detailed description and plan for carrying out Year 1 activities? When listing activities in the template, is it necessary to include details about how each activity will be accomplished?
A detailed description of how each activity will be carried out during Year 1 is not required. The Activity section of the Work Plan Template is intended to capture succinct descriptions of a limited number of “key” activities applicants will conduct during Year 1 to accomplish the performance measures for each intervention, and a brief narrative description of activities proposed in Years 2–5. Activities should be limited to a reasonable number to provide enough detail about the work being proposed without exceeding the 25-page work plan limit. Information on how the applicant plans to address the required program strategies to achieve outcomes, identify target populations, and collaborate with partners should be included in the “Approach” section of the project narrative. Information on the applicant’s ability to manage the day-to-day responsibilities of the project (project monitoring, staffing, report preparation, etc.) should be described under the heading, Project Management, in the “Organizational Capacity” section of the project narrative.
Please provide guidance on the review/scoring process. With the current page limit it is critical to include all scored elements in a succinct manner. For example, the scoring criteria said to provide the 5-Year Objectives and Year 1 Objectives. Listing both sets takes 2 pages. Are points deducted if we only list the 5-Year Objectives and say Year 1 objectives are provided in the Work Plan? The "Approach" section asks to describe Program Strategies to fit the page limit, only one paragraph for each objective can be provided. Will too little detail result in point deductions for scoring (e.g., burden document, increasing surveillance data sources, evidence based program strategies, communication, etc.)?
Page 43 of the funding announcement discusses the criteria used to evaluate applications. There are three categories: Approach, Organizational Capacity of Awardees to Execute the Approach, and Evaluation and Performance Management. The reviewers will consider the application packet as a whole, with the core of the proposal being the Project Narrative and the Work Plan. The objectives are not required to be present in the Project Narrative, but can be referred to as being in the Work Plan.
In the phases of the review process, what is completeness and responsiveness?
In Phase 1 review, completeness is assessing whether all required application items are present, e.g., appropriate eligibility, various certifications, and required forms. Responsiveness is assessing whether content meets specifications, such as formats, page limits, funding limits, and other factors.
The Announcement lists Memorandum of Understanding, Memorandums of Agreement and Letters of Support. Would any of these be more persuasive than another?
No. All documentation that demonstrates partnerships will be reviewed within the Approach or Organizational Capacity of Awardees to Execute the Approach section. These review criteria are located beginning on page 43 of the announcement.
What are the review criteria for these applications?
Page 43 of the announcement discusses the criteria used to evaluate applications. There are three categories Approach, Organizational Capacity of Awardees to Execute the Approach, and Evaluation and Performance Management. The budget section is reviewed but not scored.
What is the review process for these applications? Does PGO carry out a review for responsiveness?
All eligible applications will be initially reviewed for completeness by the CDC’s Procurement and Grants Office (PGO) staff. In addition, eligible applications will be jointly reviewed for responsiveness by the CDC National Center for Chronic Disease and Health Promotion’s Division of Oral Health and PGO. Incomplete applications and applications that are non-responsive to the eligibility criteria will not advance to Phase II review. Applicants will be notified that the application did not meet eligibility and/or published submission requirements.
Will Component 1 and Component 2 applications be separated for review, or will they be reviewed together?
Component 1 applications will be reviewed as a group. Component 2 applications, which include maintenance of Component 1 strategies, will be reviewed as a group.
Will there be any flexibility for states to develop alternate performance measures that better reflect progress in a particular strategy area? For example, if a state has already achieved a required process measure, can an outcome measure be substituted?
The ultimate goal over the 5-year program period is to have all states reporting consistently on the measures to demonstrate progress on the outcomes specified in the FOA, and to report national impact of the FOA dollars. In order to analyze data across all states, it is necessary for states to report the same measures and reportable data elements. If a state has already achieved a required performance measure, they may report additional performance measures to better demonstrate progress. At this time, alternate measures cannot be substituted for the required measures.
Are states required to report on all performance measures listed in the FOA for the strategies/interventions or can additional performance measure be added?
States funded for Component 1 are required to report on all performance measures noted in the table. States funded for Component 2 are required to report on the performance measures associated with interventions and strategies they select. CDC also recognizes that some measures will be challenging for states to report and we will work with awardees to define and operationalize performance measures and identify available and feasible data sources. States also may report on additional measures that demonstrate progress on the selected interventions and strategies, but these cannot be substituted for the required measures.
What are the expected time frames for short-term, intermediate, and long-term outcomes? For example, are short-term outcomes expected within one year?
Specific time frames for each of the outcomes are not defined. These will vary by state depending on capacity and experience in working with each of the strategies. CDC will monitor progress on reaching program outcomes by analyzing data from the performance measures. In general, for Component 1, we expect to see substantial movement on the short-term outcomes by the end of the 5-year project period. For Component 2, we expect to see substantial movement on short and intermediate outcomes, and some movement on long-term outcomes by the end of the 5-project period.
Will there be definitions for the performance measures?
CDC is creating a guidance document on the performance measures that will outline the purpose, operational definition and numerators and denominators (if applicable) for each measure. Because capacity varies in states and states will make progress at different rates, CDC has not defined a time range for reaching the performance measures; however states are required to report progress on measures annually.
If we do not have baseline data for performance measures, we will provide a brief description of how the data will be collected in the future, but how should we determine an achievable target if we do not have a baseline? Does CDC have specific numerical targets for performance measures (ex: percentage increase or decrease)?
After the award, CDC will work with states to help them identify data sources and establish targets appropriate to the context and settings in which a state will be working. At this time, CDC has not set specific numerical targets for the performance measures; benchmarking will be part of the overall process of working with states on operationalizing the performance measures. For objectives in your application, please propose targets such as percentage increases that you believe will be feasible to achieve given the activities in your work plans.
Can a State Oral Health Plan be part of an existing state chronic disease plan? We have been in discussion with our CDCP and identifying partnership activities and thought this may be a possible solution.
We encourage state oral health programs to participate in development of a chronic disease state plan and other state planning efforts. Under Strategy 6, Develop plans for state oral health program and activities, the state oral health plan should be a stand-alone plan that meets ASTDD’s best practice guidelines.
Under leadership and staff capacity is the skill set of a policy analyst required or recommended? and if required, what is the definition and function of the policy analyst?
This skill set will be required to address Strategy 5, Assess facilitators/barriers to advancing oral health, and will be useful in other strategies as well, e.g., Strategy 6 and 7. Policy analysis is "determining which of various alternative policies will most achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and the goals". Policy analysis assists in the essential public health functions under Policy Development of: 1) Inform, educate, and empower people about health issues; 2) Mobilize community partnerships and actions to identify and solve health problems, and 3) Identify and educate regarding policies and plans that support individual and community efforts.
If we are sharing positions can any of the expenses be covered by the 50% for implementation? For example, if we contracted for coordination/delivery of an intervention, could that contract include evaluation services or an epidemiologist?
If you are sharing positions such as an epidemiologist or evaluator, those positions would be considered Component 1. A shared position that is coordinating an intervention, such as a sealant program coordinator, would be Component 2.
When a strategy is selected (e.g., Strategy 2) are all the activities associated with that strategy required, that is, they need to be accomplished in year 1?
For a given strategy, applicants should propose activities in their Work Plan that they plan to accomplish to meet their Year 1 Objective. All potential activities may not be applicable to the State’s situation, or may be planned for subsequent project years. The Five Year Project Objective and the Narrative Description of Work in Years 2-5 should generally describe the additional planned efforts through the five year project period.
What are there only Short Term Outcomes for Component 1 in the table on page 15? How does that differ from the maintenance of Component 1 strategies in Component 2?
The logic model on page 10 of the funding announcement shows only short term outcomes for Component 1. Basic capacity of Component 1 has only Short term outcomes.
Are BRFSS and Basic Screening Survey (BSS) funds part of Component 1?
Yes, they are under Strategy 3 of Component 1, Develop or enhance oral health surveillance.
Which component would new surveillance approaches fall under? Can they be placed under Component 2?
New surveillance approaches would fall under Component 1, Strategy 3, Develop or enhance oral health surveillance.
Is it acceptable to modify the work plans included in the FOA for components 1 and 2 for purposes of this application? Is it expected that year 1 and 5-year work plans in component 2 applications will be provided for component 1 activities?
CDC’s work plan template includes all of the required components of the work plan, as well as pre-populates the strategies and performance measures. Applicants may modify the template to add additional objectives, activities and performance measures under each strategy; prepopulated areas should not be deleted. To provide additional space, Component 2 applicants may delete the Component 2 strategies that the applicant will not address during the 5-year project period.
Applicants are not required to use the work plan templates; however, applicants should include in the work plan the elements listed on page 21 of the funding announcement.
Applicants for Component 2 should identify in their work plans the objectives and activities to show how they will maintain their Component 1 capacity.
Should applicants choose their own strategies or are we expected to implement those listed in the component tables? Can applicants propose additional program strategies to support the outcomes?
Applicants for Component 1 should address all 7 strategies. Applicants for Component 2 should maintain efforts for Component 1 and address one or more of the preventive interventions in Component 2. Emphasis for Component 2 should be placed on reaching or maintaining water fluoridation at or above the Healthy People 2020 objective and on reaching or exceeding the Healthy People 2020 sealant objective by expanding school-based/ -linked sealant programs with a goal of reaching at least 50% of high-risk schools in the state. Applicants for Component 2 that choose to focus on implementing strategies to affect the delivery of targeted clinical preventive services and health systems changes should support their activities using evidence-based or best practices. Applicants may select existing evidence-based strategies that meet their needs or describe the rationale for developing and evaluating new strategies.
In the workplan template, is there a specific font to use? The narrative requires a specific font so we want to make sure that we can choose our own font. In addition, can we delete Activity rows if we do not have any? Since the workplan is limited to 25 pages, we want to make sure that we do not exceed that limit.
The template is set for size 11 font. It is acceptable to delete unused Activity rows.
Would CDC consider a school-linked intervention to increase the % of children with sealants in School-based Health Centers an appropriate evidence-based strategy under Strategy #7?
Yes, that could be an appropriate approach. Without knowing the details of the intervention, it may be applicable to Component 2, Strategies 2 or 7. The applicant should justify the proposed approach.
A reportable data element for Component 2 for school-based sealant programs is to report the number of school-based sealant programs located in schools in a rural area and, with respect to the school district in which the school is located, the district involved has a median income that is at or below 235% of the poverty line (as defined by 42 U.S.C. 9902(2)). Where does the 235% come from, that is, what is the source or rationale for choosing that percentage?
This language reflects 42 U.S.C. Section 247b-14, Oral health promotion and disease prevention.
Are logic models and/or evaluation plans for recipient activities in DP08-802 (which parallel those in component 1) expected/required in component 2 applications?
Applicants for Component 1 or 2 are not required to submit logic models under this funding announcement. All applicants are required to submit an evaluation and performance measures strategy as part of their project narrative (see pages 36 to 38 of the funding announcement), and include objectives and activities for evaluation in their work plan under Component 1 Strategy 4.
Applicants should provide an overall evaluation and performance measures strategy that includes at least three proposed evaluation focus areas and is consistent with CDC’s strategy. CDC will work with awardees to develop their evaluation plan during the first grant year.
In reviewing the work plans with the FOA, where is it anticipated to list which of the 4 domains the activities fall under for the work plans submitted with the application? Additionally, is the listing of the domain only anticipated for component 2 activities or also expected with component 1 activities?
The CDC work plan template includes check boxes to indicate the corresponding domain for each strategy. Applicants may choose from Domain 1: Epidemiology and Surveillance; Domain 2: Environmental Approaches to Promote Health; Domain 3: Health Systems Interventions; Domain 4: Community-Clinical Linkages; and/or Cross-cutting Issue – Applies to All Domains. Applicants should identify the respective domain(s) for both Component 1 and Component 2 strategies.
Can Component 2 implementation funding be used to support travel to the Murfreesboro training, if fluoridation is one of our chosen interventions?
Yes. Component 2 implementation funds may be used to support travel to attend fluoridation training as outlined in Strategy 6 of Component 2 (page 18 of the funding announcement).
Does CDC want states to include baseline and targets for each performance measure (if/when data is available) OR does CDC only want baseline and targets for the SMART 5 year and annual objectives ?
Applicants are not required to provide baseline and targets for each performance measure as part of the application. If awarded, the state will work with CDC to complete a Baseline CDC Program Performance Measures Report within 30 days of the award (pg. 49 of the funding announcement). Applicants have the option of providing baseline and targets in the application, if desired. Applicants should provide baseline (if available) and targets within the SMART 5-year and annual objectives.
Describe strategies to support increased access to clinical care services, since this funding does not pay for clinical care.
CDC provides examples of systems level changes on page 19 of the Announcement. The applicant may implement a different approach if clear rationale exists and if the program will be adequately evaluated.
Under the Component 2 budget requirements, the FOA states that no more than 50% of the proposed budget may be used to maintain basic capacity (all 7 strategies from Component 1). If a state chooses to apply for Component 2 will the state be required to fund specific positions to maintain basic capacity? Would shared positions and/or contractual positions, be acceptable?
In Component 2, the applicant has the flexibility to fund positions that will maintain basic capacity within the 50% limit. As listed on page 10 under Strategy 1, the preferred public health skill set includes 1) a dental professional with public health training; 2) an oral health epidemiologist; 3) a program coordinator or manager; 4) a health communications and oral health literacy specialist; 5) a policy analyst; and 6) an evaluator. Shared and/or contractual positions are acceptable.
Under Component 2, are applicants required to address all strategies or are we able to select just one of them?
For Component 2, applicants are required to maintain efforts for Component 1 and address one or more of the preventive interventions and related strategies in Component 2.
MOU/MOA are these to be fully executed at the time of the submission of the application? Or is a draft of such a document acceptable.
If you do not have a signed MOU/MOA, you may include a draft MOU/MOA, but it would be preferable to include a letter of support from the partner stating that the MOU/MOA is in process and the partner is committed to supporting you in this project.
Our state health agency created a new MOU with our Department of Education in mid-April 2013. The MOU mentions oral health in connection with overall efforts and relative to the MCH Block Grant. The purpose of the new MOU is to expand an old MOU to also delineate each agency's responsibilities for activities to be pursued under CDC-RFA-DP13-1305, State Public Health Actions to Prevent and Control Diabetes, Heart Disease, Obesity and Associated Risk Factors and Promote School Health. In our response to DP13-1307, we will be referencing our specific relationship with our Department of Education and would like to provide the existing MOU although it's not specific to our response. It is unlikely that the two departments will consider another MOU this soon. We would include additional language specific to our work for the next iteration, and will indicate that we plan to do so in our proposal. Will that be acceptable?
The objective review panel will consider the contribution of the existing MOU to your proposal.
Are states required to use YRBS?
No. Although YRBS is not a required data source, states may use the YRBS as 1 of the 3 additional data sources required/identified in the table regarding oral health surveillance on page 12 of the FOA.
Can you please clarify the expectations for surveillance and epidemiology activities?
See Component 1, Strategies 3 and 4 on pages 12-13 of the FOA for expectations related to developing or enhancing oral health surveillance in Component 1. All grantees (Components 1 and 2) are expected to carry out surveillance and epidemiology activities.
There is not a Domain 1 table in the enhanced component section of the FOA. Should Domain 1 activities (surveillance and epidemiology) be included in the work plan along with activities chosen from other Domains?
Epidemiology and surveillance activities are included as Strategy 3 under Component 1.
If our state conducts its own version of YRBSS, is that an acceptable data source for this FOA?
Yes, this is an acceptable data source.
Will awardees be assigned one project officer for the grant?
There will be one lead project officer assigned to each award.