Food Systems For Nutrition Innovation Lab

All applications must be led by a U.S. based academic institution and include at least one partner from the selected focus country. The lead U.S. based institution will serve as the primary subawardee, issuing lower-tier subawards to other institutions as necessary. Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate past performance or history of collaboration among the proposed partners as well as to define clear roles and responsibilities for each partner.

The FSN-IL strongly encourages applications from, or partnering with, qualified Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) in the United States including, but not limited to, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Predominantly Black Institutions, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges, and Universities, and Asian American Native Alaskan and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions.

Applicants must have a Universal Entity Identification (UEI) from the System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of award. Awards will only be made to institutions with SAM UEIs, so if an institution does not have one, it is recommended that the process for obtaining the UEI be started as soon as possible. Invited applicants should note their UEIs in their application documents. If they do not have a UEI at the time of application, please state so and provide new UEIs when they are received.

The applicant is responsible for ensuring that no individual or organization proposed as part of the activity is excluded from U.S. Government assistance and acquisition awards. If selected, the applicant will be required to provide a letter of assurance confirming eligibility. The U.S. Government’s excluded parties list is now maintained in SAM.

FSN-IL supports private sector engagement as a critical component in the food system to promote scale-up and sustainability. Applicants are strongly encouraged to identify private sector partner(s) as appropriate. For guidance, applicants are encouraged to read and apply USAID’s Private Sector Engagement Policy. However this RFA cannot support any costs associated with construction and/or building. None of the funds can be used for infrastructure development including development of agricultural facilities such as irrigation systems, markets, warehouses, other types of buildings, roads, bridges, and collection sites.

Awards under this RFA will be subject to the cost principles detailed in the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (commonly called “Uniform Guidance”). Applicants and any proposed subawardees will additionally be subject to the appropriate USAID Standard Provisions, Standard Provisions for U.S. Nongovernmental Organizations, Standard Provisions for Non-U.S. Nongovernmental Organizations, Standard Provisions for Cost-Type Agreements with Public International Organizations (PIOs).

The focus in FSN-IL’s first round of calls for applications is on identifying actions to support storage, packaging, and cooling innovations to reduce loss and waste and ensure food safety of nutrient dense perishable foods in target geographies. Priority will be given to high quality proposals that further our understanding of i) policy actions to enable and regulate scaling of innovations ii) business strategies and models to enable scaling of innovations, and iii) cost effectiveness of bundling of innovations around storage, packaging, and cooling. These topical areas are not mutually exclusive but should lead to actionable investments that support food systems transformation for nutrition in South Asia and Southern Africa.

Specific research topical areas that will allow FSN-IL to identify the aforementioned actions include the following:

Research Topical Area 1: Policy actions to enable scaling of innovations

In this topical area, we will consider assessments of the effectiveness and/or cost effectiveness of policy actions. Actions include those that support and/or incentivize, or those that are aimed at, providing regulatory oversight of innovative interventions. The innovations and interventions will address storage, packaging, and cooling and will aim at reducing food loss and waste, ensuring food safety while increasing access and affordability of perishable nutrient dense foods. Topics given consideration will also include assessments/analysis of sustainability of the considered interventions.

Examples within this research topical area include:

1. 1. Effectiveness of government subsidies or other incentives supporting the adoption and scale-up of innovative interventions (e.g., public subsidies on the price of specified storage, packaging and/or cooling technologies)
   2. Impact of regulatory oversight on the scale up of innovative interventions
   3. Effectiveness of fiscal policy incentives such as tax incentives to private sector enterprise on the scale up of innovative interventions
   4. Climate smart investments that enhance storage, packaging, or cooling of perishable foods
   5. Effectiveness of supporting private sector enterprise in many perishable foods more accessible to low-income consumers through, for example, tax incentives, commercial land zoning, etc.

Research Topical Area 2: Business models and strategies for delivery of innovations at scale

Ensuring innovation uptake and measurable impact at scale requires different management approaches and different business models than if working on a small or pilot basis. While there are many kinds of institutions and voluntary operations that can do things on a small scale, according to Cooley (2018) “there are only three that are capable of delivering development outcomes sustainably at scale – governments, markets and, in exceptional cases, large NGOs [non-governmental organizations].”

Funders of any innovation need workable strategies for delivering effectively at scale. The research to be supported by FSN-IL in this topical area seeks to better understand and document a) the factors that affect feasible uptake and impact of any innovation at scale, b) appropriate business models or costed strategies that can achieve scaling of innovations, and c) the active agents of change, intermediary institutions, private sector companies and/or community-level organizations that can make demonstrable scaling happen. We want to see fully costed business models or strategies for scaling defined innovations spelled out and tested in appropriate settings. We will consider concepts that focus on increasing the understanding of the business potential of delivery mechanisms for scaling up of innovations. These could include public delivery through extension services, commercial retail, program-based delivery, or other innovative delivery systems. Innovations targeted under this topical area could focus on any part of the value chain.

Examples of research topics may include:

1. 1. Development and implementation of business models and assessment of their potential to make innovations more accessible to the end user thus achieving impact
   2. For defined innovations, articulate detailed business models that explain i) cost of an innovation (technology, system) in multiple geographies, ii) cost of delivery to intended users (defining exactly how the innovation would get to intended adopters), iii) actual/estimated returns on investment by adopters and those delivering to adopters?
   3. Assessment of the economic benefits of delivery mechanisms for scaling and/or understanding the potential for commercialization of specific delivery mechanisms
   4. Identifying opportunities for the delivery of unique innovations (e.g., effective interventions that need cost-effective delivery mechanisms such as the case of nematodes within the context of IPM interventions)
   5. Comparison of business models and/or approaches for scaling delivery and increasing access to innovations

Innovations will address storage, packaging and cooling and, as already noted, focus on reducing food loss and waste and ensuring food safety of perishable nutrient dense foods.

Research Topical Area 3: Determining the cost effectiveness of innovation bundling

Innovation bundling, either social and/or technological, that is context specific either at the systems level or at different points in the supply chain has been identified as a way forward in supporting agri-food systems transformation. However, it remains necessary to couple technical advances with social and policy change in socio-technical innovation bundles (Barrett et al 2022). Testing of the concepts and/or the implementation of innovation bundles is also critical, as is assessment of the effectiveness of benefits and costs are critical. In this topical area, we will consider research to test and validate new innovations in storage, packaging, and cooling. The questions here will focus on the potential for such innovations to work within the context of the target geographies, if they can be commercialized, and, if so, whether they are cost effective.

Examples within this research topical area include:

1. 1. Cost effectiveness of bundling innovations relating to storage, packaging and/or cooling across the food system.
   2. Cost effectiveness of one or more existing innovation bundles that minimize food loss and waste and improve food safety for nutrient dense foods. This includes the cost of delivering to adopters (the mechanism by which adopters gain access to an innovation for them to use), the cost to users, and expected economic returns to individual users and to those making the innovation available to users (government systems, companies, etc.). 
   3. Assessment of delivery of specific innovation bundles to potential adopters/users at scale, including the cost of delivery and the potential measurable impact if implemented at scale. [Delivery mechanisms could include government supported programs (such as extension services or school-based programs), PVO interventions to target communities, commercial business sales, etc.]
   4. Assessment of the measurable benefits to nutrition of innovation(s)/bundles(s), articulated in terms of cost of adoption and use versus cost of delivery, in relation to measurable outcomes in ‘nutrition’ (diet quality, nutrient sufficiency, reduced inequality in access to nutrient-dense foods).

Timeline of Events:

• • Deadline for submission of written questions: December 22, 2022
  • Posting of responses to written questions: January 6, 2023
  • Deadline for submission of concept notes: January 20, 2023
  • Invitations sent for full proposals to selected applicants: February 6, 2023
  • Deadline for submission of full proposals (to be confirmed with invited applicants): March 10, 2023

The RFA process will consist of two stages: concept note and full proposal. Only selected concept notes will be invited to submit full proposals. All concept notes must be submitted in Piestar RFx. Late submissions will not be reviewed. Additions or modifications must be received by the system by 5:00 pm EST on January 20th, 2023 (i.e be sure to allow time for internet delays, as late applications will not be accepted). The FSN-IL is not responsible for late or incomplete submissions.

Please download the FSN-IL Concept Note Template and the Preliminary Budget Template to complete your application. The following is required at the time of concept note submission:

• Title Page (1 page maximum)
  • Project title
  • Target country
  • Title
  • PI (include name, title, institutional address, phone, fax, and email)
  • List of collaborating institutions and organizations
  • Universal Entity Identification (UEI) from the System for Award Management (SAM)
  • Duration of the project
  • Total budget requested
  • Contact information for authorized official from the lead institution
• Technical Narrative (3 page maximum)
  • This includes:
    • Brief overview of innovation, technical approach, rationale for the approach, anticipated results and impacts, and incorporation of cross-cutting themes
    • Geographic focus (zone(s) of influence within the country)
    • Clear project goal and specific objectives
• Timeline (1 page maximum)
  • This includes a schedule or timeline of activities over the life of the project (3 years), delineated by the project’s objectives. There is no required format at the concept note stage.
• Qualifications (2 pages per CV; 4 pages maximum)
  • Required: CV of PI (maximum of 2 pages)
  • Optional: CV of lead host-country PI/collaborator (maximum of 2 pages)
• Citations/References
  • This includes a list of references used in the concept note
• Preliminary Budget (1 page maximum)
  • Required template provided- ‘Preliminary Budget Template‘
  • This includes a summary budget of expenditures for the lead institution and all project partners. See Section 6.3 Budget Guidance (page 10) on the RFA form for more information.
• Budget Justification (1 page maximum)
  • This includes a one page justification of budget expenditures
• Letters of Support (1 page per letter)
  • Encouraged but not required with concept note; This includes non-binding documentation of collaborators’ intent, willingness, and ability to commit to conducting activities together if the proposal is selected for funding

Questions regarding this RFA should be submitted via Piestar or to foodsystemsnutrition@tufts.edu by December 22nd, 2022. Answers will be posted on January 6th, 2023.