Strengthening Partnerships, Results, and Innovations in Nutrition Globally (SPRING) | Apply Online

SPRING (USAID) Grant Opportunity FAQs

1. What is the SPRING opportunity?

SPRING stands for Strengthening Partnerships, Results, and Innovations in Nutrition Globally. It was a USAID funding competition designed to support the U.S. Government's expanded priorities on nutrition and food security under major initiatives such as the Global Health Initiative and Feed the Future.

2. What was the main purpose of SPRING?

The intent was to fund a major global technical assistance platform to help countries strengthen how they design, finance, deliver, and evaluate nutrition actions, with an emphasis on reaching vulnerable populations, especially women, infants, and young children.

3. What type of award was USAID planning to make?

USAID planned to make a single, large cooperative agreement.

4. How many awards were expected under this opportunity?

USAID expected to make 1 award.

5. What was the period of performance for the SPRING award?

The cooperative agreement was planned to run for five years.

6. How much funding was available?

Total funding was set at $200,000,000, and both the award ceiling and the award floor were listed as $200,000,000, reflecting USAID's intent to fund one award at that total level.

7. What was the activity area for this opportunity?

The activity area was Food and Nutrition.

8. What does it mean that the instrument is a cooperative agreement?

A cooperative agreement typically means USAID would have substantial involvement during implementation compared to a standard grant.

9. What were the key technical goals USAID expected SPRING to achieve?

SPRING was expected to advance both policy and program results in partner countries, including accelerating progress on national nutrition policies, strengthening country-level capacity to design and implement nutrition programs, building the evidence base for nutrition, promoting delivery of a core package of proven nutrition interventions, tailoring approaches to country contexts, and improving coordination among partners.

10. What kind of policy support was envisioned under SPRING?

A core expectation was hands-on support to governments and stakeholders to develop, update, and operationalize nutrition strategies, guidelines, and implementation plans, with the goal of accelerating progress on national nutrition policies.

11. What does capacity building mean in the context of SPRING?

Capacity building was described as strengthening country-level ability to design, implement, and evaluate nutrition programs so they become more effective, better targeted, and more sustainable over time. This could include support for planning and management systems, monitoring and evaluation approaches, training and mentoring of staff, and helping institutions use data to improve program performance.

12. Was SPRING expected to support monitoring and evaluation (M&E)?

Yes. The description specifically included strengthening monitoring and evaluation approaches and improving the use of data to enhance program performance.

13. How did SPRING plan to strengthen the nutrition evidence base?

The opportunity emphasized generating, synthesizing, and applying research and operational learning to improve nutrition interventions.

14. What is meant by the "core package of nutrition interventions"?

SPRING was expected to promote effective delivery of a core package of proven, high-impact nutrition actions, generally delivered through health systems and potentially linked sectors. The specific package was not detailed in the summary provided.

15. Were country approaches expected to be standardized or tailored?

Approaches were expected to be tailored to country context, with country-specific strategies to scale up nutrition programs rather than a one-size-fits-all model.

16. What role did coordination play in SPRING?

Coordination was a major feature. SPRING was expected to facilitate collaboration among in-country partners, including across other U.S. Government-supported activities and with national and local stakeholders, to align efforts, avoid duplication, and maintain consistent technical standards across programs and geographic areas.

17. Could applicants include partner organizations or subawardees?

Yes. USAID noted that applicants could propose formal arrangements with partner organizations and/or subawardees, indicating that consortium-based implementation and subcontracting or subawarding were anticipated and acceptable.

18. Was cost sharing or matching required?

Yes. The opportunity included a required cost sharing or matching component.

19. What is the Funding Opportunity Number for SPRING?

The Funding Opportunity Number was RFA-OAA-11-000008.

20. When was the opportunity posted?

The posted date was April 21, 2011.

21. What was the original closing date and time?

The original closing date was May 26, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern.

22. Was the deadline extended?

Yes. The closing date was later extended to June 3, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern.

23. Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was not described as open to all entities. It was listed as "Others" with clarification and specifics provided in the Request for Application (RFA), particularly the eligibility section referenced as page 28, Section III.

24. What legal authority governed the award?

The legal authority cited was the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended.

25. What regulations and administrative rules applied?

The award was subject to USAID assistance regulations for U.S. nongovernmental organizations under 22 CFR 226, along with applicable OMB circulars and standard provisions for U.S. nongovernmental recipients.

26. What should applicants do if they could not access the full announcement?

For access issues, USAID listed a point of contact: Shanon Krause, Contract Specialist, reachable by phone at 202-567-5327.

27. Where in the RFA could applicants find the detailed eligibility requirements?

The summary indicates eligibility details were in the Request for Application, referenced as page 28, Section III.

28. What populations were prioritized by SPRING?

The activity was strongly focused on reaching vulnerable populations, especially women, infants, and young children.

29. Was SPRING meant to support both policy and program outcomes?

Yes. The opportunity description states SPRING was structured to help USAID advance both policy and program results in partner countries.

30. Did SPRING explicitly address financing of nutrition actions?

Yes. One of the stated aims of the technical assistance platform was to help countries improve how they design, finance, deliver, and evaluate nutrition actions.