Common use of Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes Clause in Contracts

Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. The cognizant Mission Director (MD), Assistant Administrator (AA), or Head of an Independent Office that reports directly to the Administrator has the authority to make a determination to restrict eligibility based on programmatic purposes. The determination does not need to be a separate document but may be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, Selection of Instrument memorandum, other assistance planning documentation, or an amendment to the document. The Planner/AOR is responsible for preparing the determination, which must provide the programmatic rationale for restricting eligibility consistent with this section, and support how the rationale outweighs USAID’s policy preference for, and the benefits of, an unrestricted competitive process. The authority for the determination is not delegable. The cognizant RLO or GC Bureau or Independent Office backstop attorney must clear the determination. For a determination to restrict eligibility for an award over $10 million ($20 million for Critical Priority Countries (CPCs)) to a single organization for programmatic purposes, the written determination must also describe the steps taken, including market research, outreach, and public notices, to identify alternatives including engaging with a broader cross-section of development partners as required by Agency policy. This determination must be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, or other assistance planning documentation. (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include: i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID; ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries; iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.

Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. The cognizant Mission Director (MD), Assistant Administrator (AA), or Head of an Independent Office that reports directly to the Administrator has the authority to make a determination to restrict eligibility based on programmatic purposes. The determination does not need to be a separate document but may must be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, Selection of Instrument memorandum, or other assistance planning documentation, or an amendment to the document. The Planner/AOR is responsible for preparing the determination, which must provide the programmatic rationale for restricting eligibility consistent with this section, and support how the rationale outweighs USAID’s policy preference for, and the benefits of, an unrestricted competitive process. The authority for the determination is not delegable. The cognizant RLO or GC Bureau or Independent Office backstop attorney must clear the determination. For a determination to restrict eligibility for an award over $10 million ($20 million for Critical Priority Countries (CPCs)) to a single organization for programmatic purposes, the written determination must also describe the steps taken, including market research, outreach, and public notices, to identify alternatives including engaging with a broader cross-section of development partners as required by Agency policy. This determination must be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, or other assistance planning documentation. (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include: i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID; ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entity iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries; iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge. (2) Additionally, the Administrator must approve the written determination for an award or amendment to a single organization as a follow-on with substantially the same program description as an existing award to that organization, where the amount of the award or amendment is $40 million or above. If the award was approved under the SOAR process and the determination was included as a part of the SOAR package, then no further Administrator approval is required. (3) If an award is extended beyond ten years from the original award date, the AOR must obtain the Administrator’s approval for the extension. (4) The AO must file the final written determination in the award file in ASIST.

Restricted Eligibility Based On Programmatic Purposes. The cognizant Mission Director (MD), Assistant Administrator (AA), or Head of an Independent Office that reports directly to the Administrator has the authority to make a determination to restrict eligibility based on programmatic purposes. The determination does not need to be a separate document but may be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) as part of an AAM (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, Selection of Instrument SOI memorandum, other assistance planning documentation, or an amendment to the document. The Planner/AOR is responsible for preparing the determination, which must provide the programmatic rationale for restricting eligibility consistent with this section, and support how the rationale outweighs USAID’s policy preference for, and the benefits of, an unrestricted competitive process. The authority for the determination is not delegable. The cognizant RLO or GC Bureau or Independent Office backstop attorney must clear the determination. determination.‌‌ For a determination to restrict eligibility for an award over $10 million ($20 million for Critical Priority Countries (CPCs)) to a single organization for programmatic purposes, the written determination must also describe the steps taken, including market research, outreach, and public notices, to identify alternatives including engaging with a broader cross-section of development partners as required by Agency policy. This determination must be described and approved in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) as part of an AAM (see ADS 201), equivalent activity approval document, or other assistance planning documentation.documentation.‌‌ (1) Some examples of programmatic rationales for restricting eligibility based on a written determination include: i. Increasing the Agency’s partner base by restricting eligibility to organizations that have not previously received a direct award from USAID;USAID;‌‌ ii. Developing the capability of a local entity or locally established entityentity by making a direct award to such entity that has previously only received subawards or grants under contract (for example, a transition award; see ADS 303mbb);‌ iii. Accessing specialized skills or experience through an initial award to an entity with exclusive or predominant capability based on proprietary resources, specialized facilities, or unique relationship with the national government or other institutions in the cooperating country or intended beneficiaries; iv. Responding to a disaster, violent conflict, political crisis, or other emergency situation that requires an award to be made more rapidly than unrestricted competition can accommodate; or v. Developing a promising science and technology concept; or a unique, innovative, or proprietary solution addressing a pressing development challenge.