Quality Improvement Capacity for Impact Project | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the Quality Improvement Capacity for Impact Project (QICIP)?

The Quality Improvement Capacity for Impact Project (QICIP) was a U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) discretionary grant opportunity offered as a cooperative agreement under the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). It was designed to strengthen and scale quality improvement (QI) for HIV clinical services by combining evidence-backed QI approaches with practical, field-based support and a structured platform for learning across facilities and across countries.

How does QICIP relate to the earlier Quality Improvement Center (QIC) work that started in 2005?

QICIP built on work that began in 2005 through the Quality Improvement Center (QIC). The earlier effort demonstrated improvements in HIV clinical service quality and helped strengthen QI infrastructure, expand performance measurement capacity, improve documentation systems, monitor implementation of national guidelines, and support countries in identifying priorities for HIV policy and planning. QICIP was intended to broaden that model by supporting a wider range of evidence-based QI approaches and emphasizing field support and cross-country knowledge sharing.

What was the main goal of the QICIP award?

The project aimed to improve HIV clinical services in concrete, patient-relevant ways, while also building durable capacity within host country health systems and within host country government agencies responsible for setting standards and improving performance. The intent was to help create sustainable systems for continuous improvement beyond the life of the award.

What aspects of health care quality did HRSA emphasize for expected impact?

HRSA framed expected impact across multiple dimensions of health care quality: effectiveness and efficiency, patient-centeredness, safety, accessibility, and equity. The project focus was not limited to short-term site-level improvements; it emphasized building long-term systems and capabilities to support ongoing improvement in HIV care.

What does "patient-relevant" improvement mean in the context of this opportunity?

Based on the description, "patient-relevant" refers to improvements that matter directly to patients receiving HIV clinical services, aligned with quality dimensions such as patient-centeredness, safety, accessibility, and equity, as well as effectiveness and efficiency in delivering care.

What does it mean that this opportunity was a cooperative agreement rather than a standard grant?

The funding instrument was a cooperative agreement, which typically indicates substantial federal involvement during implementation. In practice, this may include ongoing collaboration, technical direction, or joint planning between HRSA and the recipient, rather than a more hands-off relationship often associated with standard grants.

How many awards were expected to be made, and what was the total anticipated funding level?

The announcement anticipated making up to two awards, with an estimated total funding level of $20,000,000.

What is the CFDA number associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity was listed under CFDA number 93.266, titled "Health Systems Strengthening and HIV/AIDS Prevention, Care and Treatment under PEPFAR."

Was cost sharing or matching required to apply?

No. The opportunity stated that no cost sharing or matching was required.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was described as broad and included U.S. or foreign public entities and nonprofit private entities. Examples of eligible applicants included 501(c)(3) nonprofits (other than institutions of higher education), schools of medicine, nursing, and public health, schools of management and public administration, academic health centers, community-based organizations, faith-based organizations, and consortia of eligible organizations.

Were applicants required to be based in the United States?

No. The eligibility language included U.S. or foreign public entities and nonprofit private entities, and the description explicitly left room for qualified partners based in PEPFAR countries.

Could a consortium apply?

Yes. Consortia of eligible organizations were listed among eligible applicants.

Could awards go to more than one implementing partner?

Yes. The description noted that awards could go to one or more implementing partners.

How did the opportunity reflect "country ownership" and local capacity building?

The opportunity explicitly left room for qualified partners based in PEPFAR countries and emphasized building durable capacity within host country systems and within host country government agencies responsible for standards and performance improvement. It also emphasized cross-country learning and sharing knowledge across facilities and countries.

What types of capacity was QICIP trying to build for long-term sustainability?

In practical terms, the project emphasized helping countries develop the people, systems, measurement routines, and governance structures needed to sustain continuous improvement in HIV care beyond the life of a single award.

Was the program focused only on isolated site-level quality improvement projects?

No. The opportunity was structured to move beyond isolated QI projects and instead create scalable, shared, and sustainable systems for measuring, managing, and continuously improving HIV clinical care across facilities and national programs.

When was the funding opportunity posted, and what were the key dates?

The opportunity was posted on January 14, 2015. The application closing date was March 16, 2015. The announcement was later archived on May 15, 2015.

What was the funding opportunity number?

The funding opportunity number was HRSA-15-021.

What should an applicant have done if they could not access the full announcement electronically?

HRSA provided a grants application center contact for applicants who could not access the full announcement electronically, including a point of contact (John Hannay) for assistance.

What was the overall purpose of the knowledge-sharing component mentioned in the announcement?

The opportunity emphasized creating a structured platform for sharing knowledge across facilities and across countries, supporting broader learning and the spread of effective quality improvement approaches rather than keeping improvements isolated to individual sites.