What is your opinion about the following listed request for cooperative agreement? Using the critieria in the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, should it be a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid=01-17696-filed

By Anonymous on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 11:39 am:

This action looks to be a perfect canidate for a "Non-Assistance Type Cooperative Agreement" discussed in an earlier thread. If this type of agreement is unavailable then I would lean more towards a contract.

ODPHP seems to have a requirement for the management and support of their Healthy People 2010 Community Implementation Program. If that's the case, then a contract is probably the proper instrument to use because the services required are for the direct benefit or use of the Government, i.e., managment of their program. If a cooperative agreement is awarded, the recipient(s) would be performing administrative support and managmement functions for ODPHP. I'm sure the reason why the action is a cooperative agreement and not a grant is because ODPHP will need to retain direct control of the actions taken by the recipient.

By anon on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 04:14 pm:

I suspect the problem is with the subgrants.
Reading through the scope of work, the cooperative agreement should probably be a contract. In essence ODPHP is hiring the non-profit to administer the program for ODPHP.

On the other hand, these little $2K subagreements that the prime is responsible for awarding appear to meet the criteria for a grant and treating them as subcontracts would be overkill.

If the basic agreement is a contract, the subagreements would have to be subcontracts. In order to treat the subagreements as grants, the basic has to be some type of financial assistance.

Because the subagreements are so small it probably doesn't make a difference whether they are subcontracts or subgrants, but with larger subagreements the mandatory flowdowns and other requirements can have an impact.

By bob antonio on Thursday, July 19, 2001 - 06:43 pm:

Anons:

There is an HHS press release dated July 16, 2001, on the Today's Grants page that discusses the munchkin-grants. The total amount will be between $500,000 to $700,000 for the munchkin-grants.

By Anonymous on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 10:42 am:

Bob--

I understand the HHS press release to mean the $500,000 to $700,000 will be used for the award of one or more management and support cooperative agreements. The recipient(s) of these $500,000 to $700,000 cooperative agreements will in turn be responsible for awarding numerous munchkin grants. It's not clear to me if the $500,000 to $700,000 used for making the cooperative agreement awards will also be used to fund the numerous munchkin grants. It gives me the impression that there may or may not be a separate pot of money for the munchkin grants.

Additionally, I disagree that the problem is in the subgrants. I believe the problem is the interpretation of the FGCA definitions for contract and cooperative agreement.

HHS appears to be involved in an "intermediary" situation. The actual grant recipients, in this case, are the organizations receiving the munchkin grants. The intermediary (or third party) is the recipient(s) of a cooperative agreement(s) for management and support services. HHS had to determine whether their main purpose was to acquire the services of the intermediary, or whether they are providing assistance to the intermediary.

From what I can tell, HHS looks to be acquiring the services of the intermediary. Hence a contract should be the proper instrument.

By Anonymous on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 11:50 am:

As an outside observer, it appears that they do want a contractor to run the program and award the small grants. However, isn't this an inherently governmental task? Someone in HHS should at least be approving and signing the grants even if the contractor did the legwork and selected the grantees.

By bob antonio on Friday, July 20, 2001 - 11:58 am:

Most recent anon:

Yes, that is what the notice and press release says. The intermediary and the munchkinettes will have $500,000 to $700,000.

Here is another with a description of work that is not as specific as the first one mentioned. It is on the Today's Grants page also.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid=01-17909-filed

If the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act (FGCA) is good law, it should not work as an impediment to successful federal program management under another law. I am not sure what is appropriate in these cases.

If the FGCA is good law in the above two cases, then these two proposed federal assistance agreements may interfere with the fulfillment of other federal programs such as small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned business contracting.