ACYPL conducts mainly bilateral delegation projects (e.g., US to Indonesia, Moroccans to the US), generally 2 weeks in length.
The Department of State strives to create a more secure, democratic and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community.
ACYPL's 2005 program involves 30 country projects involving 270 participants, including exchanges with countries with significant Muslim populations.
Uses and Use Restrictions
Grant supports partial costs of travel, insurance, program activities, and orientation.
Program alumni participate in arranging programming for visiting delegations.
Private nonprofit institution/organization.
The ACYPL conducts two-way exchanges of young political leaders with many countries.
The programs are generally for 2 weeks.
Individuals who participate in the program will benefit.
American participant nominations are solicited annually from State legislative leaders, governors, political party officials, alumni, ACYPL members/trustees, and co-sponsors. Selection is made by a Delegate Selection Committee with Democratic and Republican co-chairs. Delegates must be aged 25- 40 and generally include State and local elected officials as well as staff and party activists. The objective is political, geographic, ethnic/racial, and gender diversity that reflects the pluralistic nature of American society. Foreign delegates are selected by ACYPL partner organizations in conjunction with American Embassy officers.
Aplication and Award Process
This program is excluded from coverage under E.O.
The State Department solicits a proposal from ACYPL annually based on the level of appropriated funds available. A portion of the funding may be competed from one year to the next.
Funding decisions are at the discretion of the Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs and based on the advice of a panel of Bureau reviewers and various State offices. Final technical authority resides with the Grants Division.
The deadline for submission of a proposal is established in the request for proposals or letter of solicitation.
Public Law 87-256, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.
Range of Approval/Disapproval Time
Decisions are generally made within 3 months of the submission of proposals, subject to the availability and timing of funding.
At the Bureau's discretion, in a given year ACYPL may be invited to submit a renewal proposal.
Formula and Matching Requirements
ACYPL raises 50 percent of its operating budget from sources other than the government.
Length and Time Phasing of Assistance
The grant is generally awarded for a 12-month period.
Post Assistance Requirements
Quarterly program and financial reports are required.
All ECA grants are subject to OMB Circular No. A-133. In accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular No. A-133 (Revised, June 27, 2003), "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations," nonfederal entities that expend financial assistance of $500,000 or more in Federal awards will have a single or a program- specific audit conducted for that year. Nonfederal entities that expend less than $500,000 a year in Federal awards are exempt from Federal audit requirements for that year, except as noted in Circular No. A-133.
As prescribed by grant terms.
FY 07 $890,098; FY 08 est not available; and FY 09 est not reported.
Range and Average of Financial Assistance
One grant per year.
Regulations, Guidelines, and Literature
Guidelines for grants are distributed in conjunction with the request for proposals/letter of solicitation; OMB Circulars.
Regional or Local Office
American Council of Young Political Leaders, 1612 K Street, NW., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006. Telephone: (202) 857-0999.
Shalita Jones, Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/C/PY), Office of Citizen Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Telephone: (202) 203-7507. Fax: (202) 203-7529.
Criteria for Selecting Proposals
The criteria for judging proposals include quality of the proposed activities and planning, track record, institutional capacity to take on additional work, cost- effectiveness and cost-sharing, attention to diversity goals, value to U.S. foreign policy objectives, and the quality of the evaluation plan.