Grants for Agricultural Research, Special Research Grants

To carry out research, to facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of the food and agricultural sciences of importance to the nation and to facilitate or expand on-going State-Federal food and agricultural research programs.

Last Known Status
Active
Program Number
10.200
Federal Agency
Agency: Department of Agriculture
Office: National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Types of Assistance
PROJECT GRANTS
Uses and Use Restrictions
Grant funds must be used for allowable costs necessary to conduct approved fundamental and applied research, extension and education objectives to address food and agricultural sciences. Awards are generally limited to high priority problems of a regional or national scope. NIFA has determined that grant funds awarded under this authority may not be used for the renovation or refurbishment of research, education, or extension space; the purchase or installation of fixed equipment in such space; or the planning, repair, rehabilitation, acquisition, or construction of buildings or facilities.
Funds may not be used for any purposes other than those approved in the grant award documents.
Funds shall not be used for tuition remission.
Indirect Costs are generally not allowable for this program.
Generally, there are no matching requirements associated with Special Research Grant programs and matching resources will not be factored into the review process as evaluation criteria.
Please refer to RFA, Part IV.D. – Applications – Funding Restrictions for specific details.
Exceptions to the general rules, as related to Indirect Cost and matching requirements, are indicated below, as deemed appropriate and necessary.

The following programs are EXCEPTIONS to the general rules:
(1) Critical Agricultural Materials (Pub. L. 95-592)
(2) Federal Administration - Research
(3) Pest Management Alternatives (aka PMAP)
(4) Supplemental and Alternative Crops [ 7 U.S.C. 3319d (c)].
(5) Policy Research Centers (Section 1419A of 7 U.S.C. 3155) and
(6) Rangeland Research

For the above-referenced EXCEPTIONS to the general rule, [i.e. #'s (1) thru (5)], the following provisions are applicable:
Section 720 of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (Pub.L. No. 112-55) limits indirect costs to 30 percent of the total Federal funds provided under each award. Therefore, when preparing budgets, applicants should limit their requests for recovery of indirect costs to the lesser of their institution’s official negotiated indirect cost rate or the equivalent of 30 percent of total Federal funds awarded. Therefore, when preparing budgets, applicants should limit their requests for recovery of indirect costs to the lesser of their institution’s official negotiated indirect cost rate or the equivalent of 30 percent of total Federal funds awarded.
Special Note on Indirect Costs as in-kind matching contributions:
Indirect costs may be claimed under the Federal portion of the award budget or, alternatively, indirect costs may be claimed as a matching contribution (if no indirect costs are requested under the Federal portion of the award budget). However, unless explicitly authorized in the RFA, indirect costs may not be claimed on both the Federal portion of the award budget and as a matching contribution, unless the total claimed on both the Federal portion of the award budget and as a matching contribution does not exceed the maximum allowed indirect costs or the institution’s negotiated indirect cost rate, whichever is less. An awardee may split the allocation between the Federal and non-Federal portions of the budget only if the total amount of indirect costs charged to the project does not exceed the maximum allowed indirect costs or the institution’s negotiated indirect cost rate, whichever is less. For example, if an awardees' indirect costs are capped at 30 percent pursuant to FY 2012 appropriated funds, Section 720 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012 (Division A of Pub. L. 112-55), the awardee may request 15 percent of the indirect costs on both the Federal portion of the award and as a matching contribution. Or, the awardee may request any similar percentage that, when combined, does not exceed the maximum indirect cost rate of 30 percent.

Exception # 6:
For the Rangeland Research program the following provisions are applicable:
Per 7 CFR 3401.5, Indirect Cost is allowable if the award is made to a Federal lab.
Pursuant to Section 1480 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 as amended [7 USC 3333(b)(1)], applicants are required to provide 50 percent matching funds from non-federal sources for all proposed Federal funds sought in the application. Non-federal matching contributions, such as cash and third party in kind, are accepted under this program as qualified by 7 USC 3015 and 7 USC 3019. Foregone indirect costs cannot be used as part of the required match. Fully discretionary.
Authorization
Section 2 (c), Public Law 89-106, 7 U.S.C. 450i(c), as amended.
Eligibility Requirements
Applicant Eligibility
Special Research Grants: State agricultural experiment stations, all colleges and universities, other research institutions and organizations, Federal agencies, private organizations or corporations and individuals having a demonstrable capacity to conduct research activities to facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of the food and agricultural sciences of importance to the United States.
Beneficiary Eligibility
For Special Research Grants: State agricultural experiment stations, all colleges and universities, other research institutions and organizations, Federal agencies, private organizations or corporations and individuals having a demonstrable capacity to conduct research activities to facilitate or expand promising breakthroughs in areas of the food and agricultural sciences of importance to the United States.
Credentials/Documentation
Proposals must be signed electronically by an official authorized to commit the institution or organization in business and financial affairs and who can commit the organization to certain proposal certifications. Prior to the award of a standard or continuation grant by NIFA, any proposed project shall have undergone a review arranged by the grantee as specified in Subpart C of 7 CFR 3400. For research projects, such review must be a scientific peer review conducted in accordance with §3400.21. For education and extension projects, such review must be a merit review conducted in accordance with §3400.22. A notice of completion of review shall be conveyed in writing to NIFA either as part of the submitted proposal or prior to the issuance of an award, at the option of NIFA. The written notice constitutes certification by the applicant that a review in compliance with these regulations has occurred. Applicants are not required to submit results of the review to NIFA; however, proper documentation of the review process and results should be retained by the applicant.

SPECIAL NOTE:
Also see CFDA Section 903: for further details. This program is excluded from coverage under OMB Circular No. A-87.
Application and Award Process
Preapplication Coordination
All RFAs are published on the Agency’s website and Grants.gov. Applicants must complete the Grants.gov registration process. Please see the following Grants.gov link for more information: http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp. An environmental impact statement is required for this program. This program is excluded from coverage under E.O. 12372.
Application Procedure
OMB Circular No. A-102 applies to this program. OMB Circular No. A-110 applies to this program. Applications should be submitted as outlined in the RFA. Applications must follow the instructions provided per Grants.Gov and in the Agency guide to submitting applications via Grants.gov.
Award Procedure
Applications are subjected to a system of peer and merit review in accordance with section 103 of the Agricultural Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 1613) by a panel of qualified scientists and other appropriate persons who are specialists in the field covered by the proposal. Within the limit of funds available for such purpose, the NIFA Authorized Departmental Officer (ADO) shall make grants to those responsible, eligible applicants whose applications are judged most meritorious under the procedures set forth in the RFA.
Reviewers will be selected based upon training and experience in relevant scientific, extension, or education fields, taking into account the following factors: (a) The level of relevant formal scientific, technical education, or extension experience of the individual, as well as the extent to which an individual is engaged in relevant research, education, or extension activities; (b) the need to include as reviewers experts from various areas of specialization within relevant scientific, education, or extension fields; (c) the need to include as reviewers other experts (e.g., producers, range or forest managers/operators, and consumers) who can assess relevance of the applications to targeted audiences and to program needs; (d) the need to include as reviewers experts from a variety of organizational types (e.g., colleges, universities, industry, state and Federal agencies, private profit and non-profit organizations) and geographic locations; (e) the need to maintain a balanced composition of reviewers with regard to minority and female representation and an equitable age distribution; and (f) the need to include reviewers who can judge the effective usefulness to producers and the general public of each application.
Evaluation Criteria will be delineated in the RFA.
Deadlines
Contact the headquarters or regional office, as appropriate, for application deadlines.
Range of Approval/Disapproval Time
Section :094 - Deadlines:
Specific deadline dates are announced on the Agency’s website: http://www.nifa.usda.gov
Contact the headquarters, as appropriate, for application deadlines. See Section : 152 for specific details.
Further, dates for specific deadlines are announced in the RFA each fiscal year.
Section :095 - Range of Approval/Disapproval Time:
From 30 to 180 days.
Appeals
Not Applicable.
Renewals
Specific details are provided in the Request for Applications (RFA) each fiscal year.
Assistance Considerations
Formula and Matching Requirements
This program has no statutory formula.
This program has no matching requirements. Funds are awarded competitively. No formula grants are awarded under Subtitle K of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 [7 U.S.C. 3319e].
Generally, NIFA does NOT require matching or cost sharing support for this program.
However, the Rangeland Research Program is an EXCEPTION to the general rule. The following represents pertinent information regarding the Rangeland Research Program [ 7 U.S.C. 3333(a)(1)]:
Pursuant to Section 1480 of the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 as amended [7 USC 3333(b)(1)], applicants are required to provide 50 percent matching funds from non-federal sources for all proposed Federal funds sought in the application. Non-federal matching contributions, such as cash and third party in kind, are accepted under this program as qualified by 7 USC 3015 and 7 USC 3019.
MOE requirements are not applicable to this program.
Length and Time Phasing of Assistance
The term of competitive project grants and/or cooperative agreements under this program may not exceed three (3) years. Method of awarding/releasing assistance: by letter of credit.
Post Assistance Requirements
Reports
Grantees are to submit initial project information and annual summary reports to NIFA’s electronic, Web-based inventory system that facilitates both grantee submissions of project outcomes and public access to information on Federally-funded projects. The details of the reporting requirements are included in the award terms and conditions. Cash reports are not applicable. Grantees are to submit initial project information and annual summary reports to NIFA’s electronic, Web-based inventory system that facilitates both grantee submissions of project outcomes and public access to information on Federally-funded projects. The details of the reporting requirements are included in the award terms and conditions. A final “Financial Status Report” (SF-269) or “Federal Financial Report” (SF-425) is due within 90 days of the expiration date of the grant and should be submitted to the Awards Management Branch, Office of Extramural Programs at the address listed below, in accordance with instructions contained in 2 CFR 3430.55 (also refer to Section 3015.82 of the Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations).

Awards Management Division
Office of Grants and Financial Management
National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA)
U.S. Department of Agriculture
STOP 2271
1400 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20250-2271
Telephone: (202) 401-4986. Grantees are to submit initial project information and annual summary reports to NIFA’s electronic, Web-based inventory system that facilitates both grantee submissions of project outcomes and public access to information on Federally-funded projects. The details of the reporting requirements are included in the award terms and conditions.
Audits
In accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular No. A-133 (Revised, June 27, 2003), "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit 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. Audits will be conducted in accordance with guidelines established in the revised OMB Circular No. A-133 and implemented in 7 CFR 3052. This program is also subject to audit by the cognizant Federal audit agency and the USDA Office of Inspector General.
Records
In accordance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Non-profit Organizations [2 CFR 215, Subpart C, Section 215.53, (OMB Circular A-110)] grantees shall maintain separate records for each grant to ensure that funds are used for authorized purposes. Grant-related records are subject to inspection during the life of the grant and must be retained at least three (3) years. Records must be retained beyond the three-year period if litigation is pending or audit findings have not been resolved.
Program Accomplishments
Fiscal Year 2013: For Fiscal Year 2013:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For the FY 2013 award cycle, NIFA had $130,894 available for a project grant award after subtracting administrative costs.

NIFA received one application requesting a total of $130,000. In July 2013, a three-member peer review panel evaluated this application. The peer panel included faculty from land grant universities and state agency scientists from the agricultural sciences and IPM communities.

The funding ratio for this program in FY12 was 100%.

The funded project has continued to develop and support online information management systems that helps guide, demonstrate and multiply impacts of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs.

(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2013:

The program made one non-competitive award to Colorado State University to operate and manage USDA’s ultraviolet radiation climatology network, and to conduct, in collaboration with other institution, research on ultraviolet radiation effects on agriculturally relevant crops. Coupled with economic models, effects research and simulations will enable us to project regional and national climate change impacts on agriculture. Instrument repair and refresh efforts have achieved network-wide data collection rates above 95%. Climatological measurements and analyses suggest that increases in tropospheric ozone and clouds may reduce UV-B in northern latitudes.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For the FY 2013 award cycle, $11,006,000 was awarded. Applications were received from four regional centers and the National Headquarters Office. A diverse panel reviewed the applications and funding decisions were made accordingly. A total of 5 awards were made. Funds support research on pesticides for use in specialty crops and minor crops.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

For the FY 2013 cycle, $1,194,099 was awarded in the Pest Management Alternative program. The program received 29 applications. A diverse panel reviewed the applications and a total of 6 awards were made. The success rate was 20.7%. Funds were used to support projects that reduce herbicide use and reduce other pesticide use in agricultural crops and in connection with agriculturally important animals.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For the FY 2013 award cycle, $1,238,000 was available for this program.

A total of four applications, requesting a total of $1,597,925, have been received in this year’s competition.

On July 26, 2013, a five-member peer review panel will evaluate these applications.

The peer panel includes a farmer-grower; faculty from two 1890 land grant colleges and universities, and one 1994 land-grant college, and a USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) national program leader.

Funds were available to support a total of four awards.

The funding ratio for this program in FY13 was 100 %.

Funded projects should support potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) research programs that focus on varietal development and testing and potato varieties for commercial production. Aspects of evaluation, screening and testing must support variety development.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

In FY 2013, the program was funded with $1 Million. Two awards were made from the pool of approved for funding FY 2012 applications. These awards support the development and demonstration of biobased products.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

For FY 2013:

The Regional Aquaculture Center program has been a cornerstone for high-priority regional aquaculture research and development projects, extension education programs, and demonstration activities in the US. Five regional Centers collaborate with the National Aquaculture Research Centers and other programs of USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS). This NIFA program funds extramural aquaculture research, education, and extension projects through the various Centers that rely on partnerships with universities, private businesses, and state agencies.

The Aquaculture Centers are unique in that they rely upon industry representatives to annually identify critical problems constraining aquaculture in each of the five regions of the US. The Centers then mobilize and support the best scientific expertise, extension educators, and facilities in the region to collaborate through multi-state projects to solve industry problems. The Centers thereby insure accountability to industry and highly leverage limited funds across multi-state research and extension programs.

The programs have contributed to addressing high-priority needs to advance sustainable aquaculture development in the Nation across a diversity of farmed aquatic species, production systems, and aquatic environments. The program is particularly effective in soliciting real-world problems from industry representatives and fostering regional and multi-institutional project team building to address high-priority industry needs. Regional proposals are funded by a rigorous and competitive peer-review process. Projects and accomplishments of the five regional centers can be accessed at the following web link: http://srac.msstate.edu/theracs.html


(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For the FY 2013 award cycle, $780,000 is available for this program. Maximum award size is $210,000.

A total of 6 applications requesting a total of $ 1, 200,480 were received in this year’s competition. On July 19, 2013, a four-member peer review panel will evaluate these applications. The peer panel includes faculty and administrators from 1862 and 1890 land grant universities.

Funds were available to support a total of 4 awards.

The funding ratio for this program in FY13 was 66 %.

Funded projects will develop canola as a viable supplemental and alternative crop in the United States; involve stakeholders in priority setting, project development and implementation; include multi-state cooperation; and complement research being conducted by the U. S. Department of Agriculture‘s Agricultural Research Service (ARS). Extension, education, and communication activities related to the research will be addressed.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

Ongoing projects from FY 2013, Highlights

•Food Policy Research Center
Issue Brief: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Family Nutrition, Summary of Findings:
SNAP has been shown to significantly reduce rates of food insecurity.
SNAP participants are disproportionately obese and have poorer diet quality in comparison to income eligible non-participants.
Strategies have been proposed for reshaping SNAP so that it better meets its objective to help people and families buy the food they need for good health.

However, research is lacking to demonstrate the potential effectiveness of these proposed program changes.

•National Agricultural and Rural Development Policy Center
Where the Jobs Went after 2007
Address Rural Economics Disadvantage
Natural Gas Extraction—Issues and Policy Options

•A Policy Research Center Proposal: The Center for Agricultural and Rural Development
Technology and Productivity in US Corn and Soybean
Can the Trend of Rural Population Decline Be Reversed?
Can Voluntary Adoption of Agricultural Practices Achieve the Hypoxic Zone Reduction Goals?
Hog Markets and the Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus

•Center for Agricultural and Food Industrial Organization - Policy Research Group
Consumer Attitudes and Labeling Regime Key to the Market Potential of Food Nanotechnology
Coexistence of GM, Conventional and Organic Food Not Always Possible
Food Labeling Standards have Significant Welfare and Distributional Impacts
Consumer-Oriented GM Products Can Hurt Producers

•OSU-UC Davis Partnership For Agricultural and Resource Policy Research
Issue Brief: What Can be Done to Reinvigorate U.S. Agricultural Research? Issue Brief: Did Rapid Growth of Ethanol Production in the US Affect Global Food Price Volatility?
Issue Brief: How Does the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Affect the United States Economy?

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):

For FY 2013:

See CFDA Section # 170 for examples of individual accomplishments for FY 2013 from projects funded in FY 2012. Program zeroed out in FY 2013 and thereafter.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2013:

Successfully awarded five (5) projects with a total funding of $1,124,505. Fiscal Year 2014: For Fiscal Year 2014:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For FY 2014:

Congress has not funded this program since 2013.

(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2014:

The program made one non-competitive award to Colorado State University to operate and manage USDA’s ultraviolet radiation climatology network, and to conduct, in collaboration with other institution, research on ultraviolet radiation effects on agriculturally relevant crops. Coupled with economic models, effects research and simulations will enable us to project regional and national climate change impacts on agriculture. Data collection rates will remain above 95%. Modelling efforts on corn and soybeans will continue.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For the FY 2014 award cycle, $11,115,000 was awarded. Applications were received from four regional centers and the National Headquarters Office. A diverse panel reviewed the applications and recommended funding each of the proposals received. A total of 5 awards were made. Funds support research on pesticides for use in specialty crops and minor crops.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

For FY 2014:

This program will not be offered in FY 2014. See the new Crop Protection and Pest Management program.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For the FY 2014 award cycle, $1,238,000 was available for this program.

A total of three applications, requesting a total of $1,406,000 have been received in this year’s competition.

On June 13, 2014, a four-member peer review panel will evaluate these applications. The peer panel includes one 1862 faculty, one 1890 faculty, one industry scientist, and one USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) National Program Leader.

Funded projects should support potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) research programs that focus on varietal development and testing and potato varieties for commercial production. Aspects of evaluation, screening and testing must support variety development.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

The FY 2014 the Critical Ag Materials (CAM Program) will support the development and field demonstration of new paint, coating, and adhesive products that are both agriculture-based and environmentally preferable. The objective of this program is to help product developers demonstrate functional performance and life-cycle environmental and economic performance against conventional products and applicable industry, military, and eco-labeling standards. The intended outcome of the CAM Program is to help commercialize agriculture-based products that can provide federal agencies, state entities, industry, the military, and consumers with safer, more cost effective, and environmentally preferable purchasing options.

In FY 2014, the program was funded with $1 million, 9 applications were received and are currently being paneled award results are expected mid-August.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

For FY 2014:

There are few new projects approved for funding at this time as many of the awards have yet to be made with the FY 2014 appropriation. Specific Aquaculture Center Plans of Work for 2014 have not been submitted to date with the exception of the Western Regional Aquaculture Center (WRAC) It is anticipated that 70 pre-proposals will be received and 10 proposals will be funded through FY 2014. Recent accomplishment reports can be found on the WRAC website: http://depts.washington.edu/wracuw
(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For the FY 2014 award cycle, $780,000 is available for this program. Maximum award size is $210,000.

A total of eight (8) applications requesting a total of $ 1,570,468 were received in this year’s competition. On June 19, 2014, a five-member peer review panel will evaluate these applications.

The peer panel includes faculty and administrators from 1862 and 1890 land grant universities, and practitioners from the food and agricultural sciences community.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

For FY 2014:

Continued policy research and communiques from the PRCs

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):

No data, zeroed out in FY 2014.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2014:

No congressional funding. Fiscal Year 2015: For Fiscal Year 2015:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For FY 2015:

Congress has not funded this program since 2013.

(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2015:

The program anticipates making one non-competitive award to Colorado State University to operate and manage USDA’s ultraviolet radiation climatology network, and to conduct, in collaboration with other institution, research on ultraviolet radiation effects on agriculturally relevant crops. Coupled with economic models, effects research and simulations will enable us to project regional and national climate change impacts on agriculture. The program will maintain high data collection rates, and will complete initial models runs for corn. Economic analysis modules will be integrated into the integrated assessment framework.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For the FY 2015 award cycle, it is expected that approximately $11,000,000 will be available to be awarded. Applications are expected from four regional centers and the National Headquarters Office. A diverse panel will review the applications and recommend funding accordingly. A total of 5 awards may be made. Funds support research on pesticides for use in specialty crops and minor crops.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

This program will not be offered in FY 2015. See the Crop Protection and Pest Management program.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For FY 2015:

Data is Not Available. Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

The program expects to make two new awards in FY 2015.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

For FY 2015:

Continued regional aquaculture research, demonstration, and extension education projects based on regional industry priorities and needs. It is anticipated that 70 pre-proposals will be received and 10 proposals will be funded in FY 2015 by the five Regional Centers. The FY 2015 funding is anticipated to fund on-going projects and new projects identified by the regional industry representatives and approved by the Centers’ Boards of Directors.

(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For FY 2015:

Data Not Available. Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

For FY 2015:

Projects will likely be terminated or may have no-cost extensions.

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):

No data, zeroed out in FY 2015.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2015:

No congressional funding.
Financial Information
Account Identification
12-1500-0-1-352.
Obligations
(Project Grants) FY 13 $22,460,094; FY 14 est $20,416,862; and FY 15 est $16,142,472 - The difference between the appropriation and obligation numbers reflects legislative authorized set-asides deducted as appropriate, and in some cases the availability of obligational authority from prior years.
NOTES:
In FY 2014, various Pest Management Programs are consolidated under Integrated Activities, Crop Protection/Pest Management Program.
Obligations for the Forest Products and Potato Breeding Research Programs are reported under Other Special Research Grants.
Range and Average of Financial Assistance
If minimum or maximum amounts of funding per competitive project grant or cooperative agreement are established, these will be announced in the annual program announcement or Request for Application (RFA).
Regulations, Guidelines and Literature
7 CFR Part 3430, Competitive and Noncompetitive Non-formula Grant Programs – General Grant Administrative Provisions and Program-Specific Administrative Provisions; 7 CFR Part 3015, USDA Uniform Federal Assistance Regulations; 7 CFR Part 3017, Government wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) ; 7 CFR Part 3018, New Restrictions on Lobbying; 7 CFR Part 3019, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-profit Organizations; and 7 CFR Part 3021— USDA implementation of Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-free Workplace (Financial Assistance).
Information Contacts
Regional or Local Office
None.
Headquarters Office
USDA, NIFA, National Program Leader, Institute of Food Production and Sustainablity, Division of Plant Systems-Protection, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 2240, Telephone: (202) 401-4939, Fax: (202) 1782.

ADDITIONAL CONTACT:

USDA, NIFA, National Program Leader, Institute of Bioenergy, Climate, and Environment, Division of Bioenergy, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 2210, Washington, District of Columbia, 20250-2210 , Telephone: (202) 401-5244, Fax: (202) 401-2653.



, Washington , District of Columbia 20250-2240 Phone: (202) 401-4939
Website Address
http://www.nifa.usda.gov/
Examples of Funded Projects
Fiscal Year 2013: For Fiscal Year 2013:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For FY 2013:

One (1) project was funded to support all integrated pest management (IPM) USDA NIFA stakeholders by providing access through interconnected online IPM databases to research, extension and education priorities; program and project outputs; logic model-based program reports; and program impacts. This project is improving Pest Management Strategic Plans and Crop Profiles with component-level databasing and is redesigning and integrating two important existing IPM websites sites, ipmcenters.org and IPM.gov.

(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2013:

The USDA has long been concerned about high levels of ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, which are known to have harmful effects on agricultural crops, rangelands, forest ecosystems, humans, and livestock. The purpose of this program is to support research which:
•generates an uninterrupted stream of climatology data;
•determines mechanisms and symptoms of plant and animal response; and
•applies tightly integrated crop and climate models to assess regional and national impacts (both biological and economic) of multiple plant stressors.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.


(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For FY 2013:

Interregional Research Project No. 4. Minor Crop Pest Management This project supports the North Central Regional IR-4 Centers at Michigan State University, Cornell University, University of Florida and University of California plus the National Headquarters Office at Rutgers University. Since the plant protection industry has little economic incentive to develop registrations for specialty crop chemicals, IR-4 develops the data that provide legal, effective, safe and IPM-compatible pest control agents for minor and specialty crops. Without this program, many specialty crops could no longer be produced in the US or would be greatly compromised in cost and quality. This project’s objectives for minor and specialty crops are to obtain pesticide clearances for food uses, further the development and adoption of biopesticides, and conduct research to protect ornamental crops. There are five regions that can apply for IR-4 funding.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

For FY 2013:

Combining tactics for sustainable insect and weed pest management in vineyards This project will look at two serious threats to the Eastern grape industry – the grape berry moth and perennial weeds. The project will look at the economics of targeted pesticide applications. It will also look at the efficacy and economics of under-row tillage as a means of disrupting grape berry moth pupation and reducing weeds as an alternative management practice. Results of this research will be shared with the grower community through Extension.

Meeting the Research & Outreach Needs for Managing Leek Moth, a New Invasive Pest of Allium Crops - This project looks for answers in combating the invasive Leek moth. Research will aim to develop management practices that will help both large-scale and small-scale conventional and organic growers avoid catastrophic losses in Allium crops throughout the U.S. by filling in gaps in knowledge about the Leek moth's ecology, the efficacy of cultural practices and insecticides against the Leek moth, the potential roles of natural enemies in Leek moth management, and the economics of such practices. A strong outreach program will help growers nationwide adopt management practices that are effective and economically viable.
Alternative Approaches to Managing Chilli Thrips, An Emerging Pest for Ornamental Nursery Production - This project will look at the invasive Chilli thrips on 'Knock Out' Roses to develop alternative control strategies in lieu of the current heavy reliance on conventional insecticides and the likelihood of resistance development in the thrips.

The overall objective of this project is to develop a biologically-based chilli thrips management strategy by integrating the use of action thresholds, cultural practices (specifically, fertilization), and biopesticides into a 'Knock Out' Rose production system. Guidance will be provided to growers on how to manipulate fertility and use biopesticides to manage chilli thrips. A long-term goal is to make the green industry more sustainable.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For FY 2013:

Release and commercialize new potato varieties to benefit all segments of the Northwest potato industry which will benefit all US producing regions. This involves germplasm enhancement, germplasm production, selection procedures, disease and stress screening, variety trial design and conduct, seed number increases, management studies, and commercial evaluations.

Develop potato varieties for release and adoption in the North Central region. Evaluate germplasm for resistance to key diseases and insect pests. Use previously validated genetic markers to screen early generations and conduct QTL mapping studies to identify new markers for variety development. Investigate the feasibility of using genotyping-by-sequencing for QTL detection and genomic selection.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

For FY 2013:

A Proposal for Commercialization of Vegetable Oil Macromonomers
$433,786

The goal of this proposal is to confirm commercial viability of vegetable oil macromonomer (VOMM) derived latex polymers, free of volatile organic content (VOC), and capable of high performance equal to or exceeding that of leading commercial latexes, and coatings.

Biobased Bisphenol-A Free Epoxides for Paint, Coating, and Adhesive Applications
$500,113

The two (2) year program includes the preparation of isosorbide-based epoxy resins and their evaluation in model coatings. Leading candidate coatings systems will be scaled-up for demonstration of product feasibility through field testing and validation using industry standard chemical, physical, and performance tests. Life cycle analysis will be performed using a cradle‐to‐gate approach to evaluate the environmental, cost and social aspects of the bio‐derived epoxide resin. The long term goal of this project is to commercialize a cost-effective, protective coatings platform that is based on non-food agricultural materials and meets or exceeds the high performance of today’s petroleum-based epoxy coatings.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

For FY 2013:

The WRAC funded Year 3 of a project entitled “Environmental and endogenous factors affecting egg quality and caviar yield in farmed sturgeon”. The WRAC also funded a new project entitled: Determination and Application of Egg Quality Measures Toward Reliable Culture of High-value Marine Finfish Species”. and a project entitled “WRAC Publications” was also funded with 2013 funds.

The Center for Tropical and Subtropical Aquaculture (CTSA) funded projects including: Development of Locally Made Commercial Feed for Tilapia Aquaculture in Hawaii; 2) Establishment of Milkfish Fry Production in Palau to Reduce Dependency on Imported Fry; 3) Establishing Coral Grouper (Plectropomus leopardus) Production in Palau through the Application of Intensive Copepod Production Technology; 4) Increasing Production and Improving Food Safety for Hawaii’s New Bivalve Industry; 5) Development of Marine Finfish Aquaculture, Aquatic Feeds, and Training in the Republic of Marshall Islands (RMI) for Sustainability and Food Security; and 6) Aquaculture Information Service for the Pacific Region, FY 2013.

Project funded by the Southern Regional Aquaculture Center include: 1) Year 1of a project entitled ”Studies to Improve the Control of Virulent Aeromonas hydrophila and Evaluate the Impact of Environmental Factors on its Abundance in Catfish Aquaculture Ponds”; 2) “Implementation of Collective Action Alternatives Identified for the US Catfish Industry”; “Identification and Removal of Adhesive Proteins from Goldfish and Baitfish Eggs and Egg Masses”; and “Improvement of Blue Catfish Germplasm for Hybrid Catfish Production”;

Projects funded by the Northeastern Regional Aquaculture Center include: 1) Measuring Flow within Shellfish Growout Systems: Developing and Evaluating a Logging Mini-flow Meter,
2) Workshop to Identify Constraints Towards Developing a Commercial Eel Aquaculture Industry Using Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) Technology, and
3) There is Gold in Them Thar Mussels; Testing the Feasibility of Golden Mussel Culture for Branding and Market Expansion of Farmed New England Mussels;
4) Improved Grow-out Methodologies for Razor Clams; and
5) New Tools to Prevent Bacterial Diseases in Shellfish Hatcheries.

Projects funded by the North Central Regional Aquaculture Center include: 1) Economic Impact Assessment: Developing Genetically Fast-Growing Monosex Male Populations in Bluegill;
2) Develop Systems and Diet Strategies to Reduce Yellow Perch Larval Mortality Burst in Indoor Recirculating Aquaculture Systems; and
3) North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Extension Project.

(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For FY 2013:

Develop agronomic methods to enhance production practices; develop better management strategies for canola diseases; and develop canola varieties with higher oil content.

Prove the usefulness of winter canola as a dual-purpose crop to continue expansion of canola acreage in the Southeastern region.

Develop and evaluate high-yielding, regionally adapted winter canola cultivars. Improve canola cropping systems by addressing agronomic management issues through scientific research. Extend production and marketing technologies for canola through appropriate extension and outreach programs.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

For FY 2013:

No funding for NIFA for new projects, Congress moved program to USDA Office of the Chief Economist.

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):
For FY 2013:

“Weather Data And Forecasting Applications For Management Of Ecological Site Transitions” focuses on the fact that millions of hectares of rangeland in the western United States have been invaded, and are now dominated, by expanding populations of introduced annual weeds. What was accomplished in 2013? 1. Gridded/modeled historical weather datasets (Daymet and Abatzoglou) were consolidated into a stored database product that is accessible by an Access database utility that allows one to enter the latitude and longitude and output either raw weather-data files, or SHAW-model input parameter files for historical microclimatic assessment. This database tool will be converted to a web-access version in the following project year and made available through the NWRC and collaborator websites. 2. Model simulations were conducted to assess slope, aspect and soil type effects on seedbed microclimate, and predicted population-germination response of 13 native perennial grass species frequently used in restoration activities in the Great Basin. Preliminary analysis suggests significant topographic variability in optimized seedbed/germination response that is correlated with native perennial vs annual-weed performance, and also correlated with weed vs perennial grass dominance as a function of topography in the Boise Foothills experimental area. 3. The SHAW microclimatic model was optimized for three soil "archtypes" (sandy loam, silt loam, loamy sand) and procedures automated for creating 75 topographic/soil seedbed scenarios for each 1 or 4km gridpoint for the gridded ESD supplement application. Gridded SHAW meteorological parameter files are currently being extracted and inserted into a GIS database for gridded modeling applications. 4. Probit, Regression and Geostatistical models for hydrothermal germination response have been compared and residual model error analyzed for 13 perennial grass and annual weed species. These models all work relatively well in estimating cumulative germination response over a 44-year test period. A germination rate sum index was simulated from hourly germination rate estimates of these seed populations and relative ranking established for a test site in southern Idaho. This rate sum index will be used as the bioassay for characterizing annual variability in seedbed microclimate in both the ESD supplement objective, and for mechanistic mapping of the fundamental and realized niche of both perennial grass and annual weed species. This rate sum index will also be used to quantitatively assess the ecological significance of alternative forecasts once we test the seasonal forecast application for rangeland restoration planning. 5. Existing data on erosion and corresponding Existing data on erosion and corresponding micrometeorological information were compiled for a large wildfire site (1 year record), a site burned and now dominated by cheatgrass (3 year record), and a Wyoming Big Sagebrush/squirreltail/bluegrass rangeland site (3 year record). We analyzed the collected sediments and determined cumulative horizontal fluxes of soil, saltation activity (# particles moving per 5 min periods, continuously), threshold windspeeds for saltation, and PM10 emissions. Next, they began an analysis of rain and soil moisture effects on the threshold windspeeds, towards the development of models.

“Linking Management Decisions With Ecological And Economic Outcomes In Grazed Systems” addresses a significant gap in the study of human dimensions of rangeland management by conducting the first in-depth analysis of rancher short- and medium-term grazing management decision-making using repeated interviews and participant observation to document decision-making processes and criteria at weekly, monthly, and annual time scales. What was accomplished in 2013? The Adaptive Grazing Management (AGM) experiment is a stakeholder lead, field experiment that is designed to investigate the process and contribution of collaborative adaptive management on the ecological and economic effectiveness of grazing management. The experiment is designed to comparative outcomes of a stakeholder managed grazing system with that of a traditional grazing system used in this region. Major project accomplishments include: 1) Stakeholder Group meeting on September 10, 2012 to initiate development of an adaptive grazing management plan, 2) second Stakeholder Group meeting on January 10, 2013 to define indicators for making management decisions regarding livestock numbers and movement, 3) a third meeting is scheduled for January 16, 2014 to finalize the management plan prior to implementation of the experiment in May 2014, and 4) a website has been designed display information for this novel experiment (http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/Docs.htm?docid=24218). The Stakeholder Group identified the following management plan to initiate this experiment. The Adaptive Grazing Management (AGM) and Traditional Grazing Management (TGM) treatments are planned to have the same annual moderate stocking rate (0.24 AUM/acre, recommended by NRCS for upland ecological sites) and the same targeted utilization rate (50% of “average” annual productivity left as standing crop residue), but will differ in terms of the timing of grazing and stock density. For the TGM treatment, grazing will occur in each pasture the entire grazing season (mid-May to early October) with no rest periods, and stocking density will be maintained at 20 yearling steers per 320 acres (0.0625 steers/acre). In contrast, the AGM treatment will rotate the single herd of 200 yearling steers among the 320 acre pastures resulting in a ten-fold higher stocking density (0.625 steers/acre) compared to the TGM treatment, and 2 pastures each year planned to be rested (no grazing, with rested pastures rotating each year). Desired management outcomes of the AGM treatment defined above are to: 1) increase livestock weight gains, 2) enhance abundance and production of cool-season perennial grasses, 3) increase vegetation heterogeneity across the landscape, and 4) increase species evenness in grassland bird community. Research goals are to investigate collaborative adaptive management to gain insight into: 1) the processes of social learning and interactions, 2) indicators and cures that are used to initiate decision at specific times, and 3) to estimate the ecological and economic benefits of adaptive management relative to traditional grazing management strategies.

“A Systems Approach To Seedling Establishment On Degraded Rangeland: Managing Ecological Processes Driving Recruitment Bottlenecks” where altered disturbance regimes are shown to be systematically destroying healthy rangeland and directly threatening U.S. agriculture, food security, and sustainability. This cooperative agreement was established to fund field experiments and microclimatic modeling objectives under a USDA-NIFA-AFRI grant "A systems approach to seedling establishment on degraded rangeland: Managing ecological processes driving recruitment bottlenecks" in cooperation with USDA-ARS, Burns, OR, University of Nevada Reno, and Utah State University. In FY2012, 15 field sites were identified in Idaho, Oregon, and Nevada that represent a range of potential climate conditions within the Wyoming big sage vegetation zone in the Great Basin sagebrush steppe. These sites were fenced and treated for weed control in anticipation of field planting activities starting in October/November 2012. Each field site will contain monitoring equipment for tracking soil temperature and water at seed and seedling depth. Planted perennial bunchgrasses and cheatgrass will be monitored for germination, emergence and seedling establishment and life cycle stages monitored relative to microclimatic seedbed conditions. These data will be used to test a conceptual model for seed- population progress between life stages, establishment, growth and mortality. Historical seedbed microclimatic simulations will be used to extend the results and application of these data to a broader range of annual weather variability across the study region. Research status and progress are reported via email, project teleconference calls and group meetings in Boise, Burns, and regional professional conferences. The agreement was established in support of objective 3 of the in-house project, the goals being to improve scientific understanding and to transfer technology related to assessing and mitigating the impacts of ecological disturbances by invasive weeds within sagebrush ecosystems of the Intermountain West.

“Innovative Use Of Seed Coating Technologies For The Restoration Of Soil Hydrology And Functional Plant Communities In Burned Semi-Arid Rangelands” focuses on the concept that in the western United States, pinyon and juniper (PJ) expansion constitutes one of the greatest weedy invasions of our time. What was accomplished in 2013? During this reporting period, two graduate thesis projects were completed. One thesis project examined the extent, severity and thickness of post-fire soil water repellency relative to ecological site characteristics within pinyon-juniper woodlands. Results from this research demonstrated how post-fire soil water repellency is widespread within pinyon-juniper woodlands and is almost always found in the tree mound zones or closely adjacent to the burned tree. In addition to tree cover, soil water repellency is also significantly correlated to tree age, soil texture, soil pH, and relative humidity levels prior to the fire. Subsequently these results suggest that as infilling processes enhance pinyon-juniper canopy cover in the coming years, post-fire soil water repellency extent and severity will increase. In addition, reductions in relative humidity brought about by a changing climate may have the potential to link additively with increased tree expansion to increase the frequency and intensity of wildfires and produce stronger soil water repellency over a greater spatial extent. The second thesis project determined soil water repellency’s impact on vegetation recovery and soil water and nitrogen availability. Results of this research indicate that water repellency can reduce soil wetting and plant and microbial access to available nitrogen, which subsequently leads to poor plant establishment. Application of wetting agents was shown to improve ecohydrologic properties required for plant growth and microbial activity by overcoming soil water repellency and thereby increasing the amount and duration of available water. Seed coating research in laboratory and field trials demonstrated that surfactant seed coating technology appears to be an effective means for mitigating soil water repellency limitations and improving rangeland seeding success. However, additional field trials are still needed on different sites and seeding years before this technology can be recommended. In addition to the development of wetting agent seed coating technology, another patent was completed on a new seed enhancement approach, using what we have designated as seed extrusion technology. Through this technology, an extruded pod is formed that provides seed coverage and enhanced conditions for seed germination and seedling growth. In another embodiment, seed is placed in a pod with activated carbon, which deactivates soil active herbicide in the immediate vicinity of planted seed. In another embodiment pellets are formed for drill seeding small seeded species. The pellet is formulated with swelling materials, which causes the pellet to break soil crust and bring seeds near the soil surface where they have a higher probability of emerging. Research was further completed to examine how rangeland fire rehabilitation decisions are made by land managers and to determine potential barriers to the adoption of our proposed seed enhancement technologies. Our surveys of land managers suggest that because of the limited success in restoring rangelands from seed (primarily low-elevation sites), they would incorporate seed enhancement technologies after they have been proven to be successful through adequate field trials.

“Spatial Methods For Low Cost Restoration Of Rangeland Ecosystem Services” focuses on the concept that rangelands constitute 50% of California, and produce 70% of the forage for a livestock industry with gross value > $3 billion. What was accomplished in 2013? A low-cost method for seeding perennial grasses was successfully developed and demonstrated in a research field. An on-ranch test was established. Data were collected on botanical composition, soil carbon, arthropod community, infiltration rate and forage quality in a network of restored and annual grassland sites in Northern California. A database was created and populated with the data. Data analyses were done and are being interpreted and incorporated into manuscripts for journal publications. Sixteen large runoff plots were maintained and used to collect runoff for assessment of water quality as affected by vegetation amount and composition. Native perennial grasses were planted in half of the plots to study the effect on water quality and yield. Soil and air moisture and temperature were collected under various vegetation conditions and spatial patterns of perennial grass plantings. Established a partnership with Solano Land Trust by which we fenced an area in Rush Ranch and seeded perennial species using the strip-seeding technique. Prepared and submitted proposals for funding to federal and local agencies.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2013:

1. Nonlinear micro-mechanics and failure analysis of wood adhesive bonds (John Nairn, Oregon State University)
2. Technical Assessment of Cross Laminated Timber from Northeastern US Forests (Stephen Shaler, Univ. of Maine)
3. Hybrid CLT panels for sustainable building solutions (Lech Muszynski, Oregon State University).
4. Development of novel hybrid cellulose nanocomposite film with potent biocide properties utilizing low quality Appalachian hardwoods (Gloria Oporto, West Virginia University)
5. Next generation CLT: mass-customization of hybrid composite panels (Todd Beyreuther, Washington State University). Fiscal Year 2014: For Fiscal Year 2014:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For FY 2014:
No project data available.


(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2014:

The USDA has long been concerned about high levels of ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, which are known to have harmful effects on agricultural crops, rangelands, forest ecosystems, humans, and livestock. The purpose of this program is to support research which:
•generates an uninterrupted stream of climatology data;
•determines mechanisms and symptoms of plant and animal response; and
•applies tightly integrated crop and climate models to assess regional and national impacts (both biological and economic) of multiple plant stressors.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For FY 2014:

Interregional Research Project No. 4 Minor Crop Pest Management This project supports the North Central Regional IR-4 Centers at Michigan State University, Cornell University, University of Florida and University of California plus the National Headquarters Office at Rutgers University.. Since the plant protection industry has little economic incentive to develop registrations for specialty crop chemicals, IR-4 develops the data that provide legal, effective, safe and IPM-compatible pest control agents for minor and specialty crops. Without this program, many specialty crops could no longer be produced in the US or would be greatly compromised in cost and quality. This project’s objectives for minor and specialty crops are to obtain pesticide clearances for food uses, further the development and adoption of biopesticides, and conduct research to protect ornamental crops. There are five regions that can apply for IR-4 funding.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

For FY 2014:

None – program not offered.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For FY 2014:

Anticipated: Potato breeding and variety development for specific high-value specialty areas. Collaborative multi-site selection, evaluation, and variety development work among states and with USDA-ARS. The overall goal will continue to develop an array of attractive, highly productive, disease- and insect-resistant potato varieties that can be employed by small and large potato producers to enhance marketing opportunities, farm sustainability and grower profits. Projects will use classical breeding techniques and will also use marker-assisted selection as needed for resistance to internal defects, diseases, and insect pests.

Anticipated: All projects will aim at release and commercialization of new potato varieties that will directly benefit all segments of the potato industry and all U.S. producing regions. These projects use a wide range of effective methods to identify valuable traits, recombined them with outstanding genotypes through crosses, and then apply selection pressures to increase the probability of creating varieties that can be produced and used more efficiently than existing varieties. Potato is a complex crop, such that there are numerous breeding goals, including high yield, improved processing quality, genetic resistance to major pests and diseases, higher levels of resistance to stresses, increased nutrient use efficiency, improved human nutritional value, and high tuber quality, and reduced use of pesticides, water, and fertilizers.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

For FY 2014:

Nine (9) applications were received for the 2014 award Cycle. Applications are currently being paneled results are expected in the mid-August, 2014.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

FY 2014 awards are currently being processed. Projects funded with the FY 2014 funding will be submitted in each of the Centers’ annual Plans of Work.

The latest proposal from the Western Regional Aquaculture Center’s (WRAC) grant request for FY 2014 will fund continuing and new projects. The proposal will fund Year 2 of a project entitled “Profitable and biosecure rock scallop culture for the West Coast; Year 2 of a project entitled “Determination and practical application of egg quality measures toward reliable culture of high-value marine finfish species; and Year 2 of a project entitled “If you feed them, will they grow? A Dietary approach to improving the growth of juvenile cutthroat trout; and a WRAC Publications project.

(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For FY 2014:

It is anticipated that projects funded in 2014 will significantly increase canola production by developing and testing superior germplasm, methods of planting, cultivation, and harvesting, and then transferring new knowledge to producers. Extension, education, and/or communication activities related to the research areas above must be addressed in the proposal.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

For FY 2014:

No funding for NIFA for new projects, Congress moved program to USDA Office of the Chief Economist.

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):

No data, zeroed out in FY 2014.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2014:

None, Congress discontinued funding. Fiscal Year 2015: For Fiscal Year 2015:

(A) Expert IPM Decision Support Systems:

For FY 2015:
No project data available.


(B) Global Change, UV-Monitoring:

For FY 2015:

The USDA has long been concerned about high levels of ultraviolet radiation from the Sun, which are known to have harmful effects on agricultural crops, rangelands, forest ecosystems, humans, and livestock. The purpose of this program is to support research which:
•generates an uninterrupted stream of climatology data;
•determines mechanisms and symptoms of plant and animal response; and
•applies tightly integrated crop and climate models to assess regional and national impacts (both biological and economic) of multiple plant stressors.

(C ) Integrated Pest Management & Biological Control:

Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(D) Interregional Research Project # 4 – (aka Minor Crop Pest Management and/or IR-4) Program:

For FY 2015:

Interregional Research Project No. 4 Minor Crop Pest Management This project is likely to continue support for four regional Centers plus a National Headquarters Office. Since the plant protection industry has little economic incentive to develop registrations for specialty crop chemicals, IR-4 develops the data that provide legal, effective, safe and IPM-compatible pest control agents for minor and specialty crops. Without this program, many specialty crops could no longer be produced in the US or would be greatly compromised in cost and quality. This project’s objectives for minor and specialty crops are to obtain pesticide clearances for food uses, further the development and adoption of biopesticides, and conduct research to protect ornamental crops. There are five regions that can apply for IR-4 funding.

(E) Pest Management Alternatives (PMAP):

For FY 2015:

None – program not offered.

(F) Other: Potato Breeding Research:

For FY 2015:

Data is Not Available. Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(G) Critical Agricultural Materials:

For FY 2015:

The program expects to make two (2) new awards in FY 2015.

(H) Aquaculture Centers:

For FY 2015:

The mission of the Aquaculture Centers program is to “support aquaculture research, development, demonstration, and education to enhance viable and profitable U.S. aquaculture production for the benefit of consumers, producers, service industries, and the American economy”. With an ambitious and critically important mission, fulfillment depends on the engagement and participation of diverse individuals associated with active public and private sectors in each region. All participants are critical, responsible and contributory to addressing the mission. The mission and organizational structure support an important regional function and network unlike most intramural and extramural programs. Industry, in the form of the Industry Advisory Council in each of the 5 Aquaculture Centers. The five Centers will continue in their role in funding regionally important research, education, and extension projects similar to projects funded through the Centers’ 25-year history.

(I) Supplemental and Alternative Crops (aka Canola Research):

For FY 2015:

Data Not Available. Pertinent data to be provided by Program at a future date.

(J) Policy Research Centers (aka Agriculture and Rural Policy Research):

For FY 2015:

No funding for NIFA for new projects, Congress moved program to USDA Office of the Chief Economist.

(K) Rangeland Research Program (aka Joe Skeen Institute and/or McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry):

No data, zeroed out in FY 2015.

(L) Forest Products Research Program:

For FY 2015:
None, Congress discontinued funding.
Criteria for Selecting Proposals
Within guidelines established for the program as described in the Request for Application (RFA).
Stay Connected

Related Grants for Agricultural Research, Special Research Grants Federal Grants

Popular Department of Agriculture Federal Grants


Latest Articles
Monday, September 15th
As kids across the country head back to the classroom, educators, parents, and students in need will find that there are number of federal grants available to ensure that the 2014 / 2015 school year is the most productive and enriching year yet.  Read more

Thursday, September 11th
It has been more than a decade since the shocking 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers, and as Americans somberly remember one of the most devastating acts of terrorism in our country's history, it's important to also recall the sense of patriotism and American pride that flooded the national consciousness in the months and years that followed.  Read more

Federal Grants Resources