Sexual Violence Prevention Grant Requests for Proposals (RFP) Questions and Answers

See the complete Sexual Violence Prevention Grant RFP. The questions and answers related to this grant RFP will be posted below.

Q: As we recently received funds from Minnesota Department of Health Sexual Violence Prevention Program (MDH SVPP)  we are wondering if we are eligible to apply again? 

A: Yes, programs are eligible to apply even if they have previously received funding from MDH SVPP, regardless of how recently the funding was received. 

Q: We are a current MDH Capacity Strengthening Initiative grantee through June 2025. Are we eligible to apply for the Sexual Violence Prevention Grant?

A: Yes, programs receiving funds through other MDH grant programs are eligible to apply.

Question: My non-profit agency is physically located in North Dakota. However, Minnesota is part of our service area and would be the focus of the grant proposal. Are we eligible to apply to this RFP? If not, can we be part of a multi-organization collaboration with an applicant located in Minnesota? 

A: Applicants must be physically located in Minnesota. Those outside of Minnesota are able to be part of a multi-organization collaboration with the main applicant being located in Minnesota. 

Question: Would greening activities for community centers/buildings where participants come in and go be allowed under the "create protective environments" priority area?  

A: Greening activities are allowed under Priority Area 2: Creating Protective Environments. See Approach Example 3 on page 11 of the RFP. 

Question: If the grant would start around August 1, do you have a goal date of when we would be alerted if we are awarded? This would be helpful to know for planning purposes 

A: All applicants will be notified about funding decisions as soon as possible, by July 2024. Grants will begin on August 1, 2024, or once the grant agreements are fully executed, whichever is later. 

Question: Would a staff member delivering child sexual abuse prevention in the community be an appropriate use of funds? 

A: This grant is not limited to a service area or population, and any age group or setting may be proposed. This grant focuses on three priority areas (see pages 10 and 11 of the RFP). This grant also prioritizes prevention strategies that create community-level and societal-level changes (see page 12 of the RFP). Activities that focus on individual-level change can be proposed. However, activities that target community-level change and/or societal-level change will be scored higher than activities that target only individual-level change. Please note that just because a prevention strategy is implemented in a community setting, does not make it a community-level strategy. See page 12 of the RFP for the definition of community-level change. 

Question: What does reporting look like for this grant? In other words, what will programs be expected to track and report back to show progress/successes/challenges? 

A: Section 2.3 Grant Management Responsibilities (pages 15 – 18) in the RFP outlines details about the grant agreement and reporting requirements for this grant program. This includes a list of items grantees will be required to track and report on, an annual progress report schedule, a requirement to submit annual work plans and budget narratives, and information on annual grant meeting/site visit schedules. Grantees will also be required to create and implement an evaluation plan throughout the grant period. The MDH SVPP Evaluator will be available to support these activities for grantees. 

Question: Can the funding of this grant be used towards hiring a new staff member to our prevention program? 

A: Yes, funding from this grant can be used towards hiring a new staff member to a prevention program. 

Question: When does the grant need to be spent by? 

A: The grant period ends January 31, 2029. All funds must be spent down before that date. MDH SVPP cannot reimburse any expenses incurred after January 31, 2029. 

Question: Is the expectation that these programs run through January 31, 2029 utilizing the grant funds? What if a project can be completed in two or three years? 

A: Projects that can be completed before January 31, 2029 are allowed. However, it is important that the shorter project completion timeframe be named, well-described, and made clear in the proposal. Also, please note that proposing a project that can be completed before the grant end date will not affect the applicant’s score, either positively or negatively. 

Question: Are indirects (facilities & administration) allowed?

A: This grant is funded through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, through the Rape Prevention and Education Funding. This particular funding limits the indirect amount to 5% of the total direct cost. This should be reflected in your budget. Please see pages 14 and 28 of the RFP for more information about indirect expenses. 

Question: I believe I read that organizations are not required to identify matching funds, right? Do you have expectations about organizations take over the funding for initiatives after the grant ends? 

A: Applicants are not required to identify matching funds for this grant. The grant period ends January 31, 2029, after which no additional expenses for this grant program can be incurred. Future funding opportunities for sexual violence prevention programming will be based on availability and cannot be guaranteed. Applicants are encouraged to incorporate sustainability planning into the grant planning process. 

Question: Could any funding be used for sharing practices/findings at conferences? 

A: Yes, that is an appropriate use of funds. Grantees will be encouraged to present on and share about their work. Grantees should include expenses related to presentation of findings (such as conference fees and travel expenses) in proposed budgets OR plan to communicate with their grant manager about and incorporate these expenses into future budgets in the future. 

Question: Did you write this grant?

A: This grant was written by the MDH SVPP team, with support from our communications coordinator, Stephanie Anderson, and violence epidemiologist, Cory Cole. This grant includes language from the MDH RFP template, and from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Question: What percent of the grant budget can be or should be used for evaluation?  

A: Evaluation is a required component of the grant, but there is no requirement for what percent of the budget can or should be used for evaluation. Applicants should determine the amount of the budget needed for evaluation based on the needs of the project they propose to implement. Please note that funds cannot be used for research or surveillance. See pages 13 – 14 of the RFP for more information on evaluation. See Section 2.2, Eligible Projects, on pages 14 – 15 of the RFP for a detailed list of eligible and ineligible expenses.

Question: Can this grant be used to fund an existing program or do we need to develop a new project?

A: Yes, this grant can be used to fund an existing program.

Question: Could activities focused on response processes, such as restorative justice programs, be allowed under priority area 2, creating protective environments, as it addresses root causes of unjust systems?

A: Activities focused on direct services such as counseling, treatment, or advocacy services to victims or perpetrators of sexual violence are not allowable under this grant program. However, restorative justice programs may be considered eligible if the applicant can clearly link the program activities to sexual violence prevention and health equity. 

Applicants are encouraged to read the following sections of the RFP that pertain to this question:

• Priority Area 2: Create Protective Environments (page 11 of the RFP) includes school restorative justice programs as an example of a program that would be allowed under this grant. Restorative justice programs in other community settings or in workplaces are also allowed. Applicants may see the approach example 1 webpage link provided in page 11 of the RFP for more information about this approach.
• Levels of Change (page 12 of the RFP) provides information about the levels of change (i.e. individual level, community level, and societal level). Activities that target community-level change and/or societal-level change will be scored higher than activities that target only individual-level change.
• Section 2.2 - Eligible Projects (pages 14 – 15 of the RFP) provides a list of eligible and ineligible expenses for this grant program. Ineligible expenses include direct counseling, treatment, or advocacy services to victims or perpetrators of sexual violence (with the exception of hotlines).

Question: We would like to offer training to students who will serve as ongoing advocates for sexual assault prevention resources for students across the campus. Additionally, we would like to expand our curriculum on sexual violence prevention to incorporate all four years. Currently, we only offer a training and resources for first year students. We would like to ensure students receive additional information and refreshers in their subsequent years of study. 

Budget items would include paying a trainer to offer the training to students who will eventually serve as advocates along with stipends to students who will serve as advocates long-term, faculty salary to develop new and expanded prevention training resources for all students. Do any of these budget items fall outside of the scope of funding?

A: All the budget items listed above fall within the scope of this RFP.

Please refer to the RFP section 2.2: Eligible Projects on pages 14 – 15 for a list of eligible and ineligible expenses.

Question: Our organization is the sole applicant, but our project will involve other partners (multiple colleges/schools). Do we need letters of support from all of those partners, or is that only applicable if we are applying *with* another organization?

The designation of partner or collaborator depends on the nature of the relationship. Funding is not necessary in order for something to be considered a collaboration. 

A multi-organization collaboration involves stronger and more formalized relationships than a partnership. Organizations might be considered collaborators if the project could not happen without their specific involvement. For instance, if an applicant proposes to implement prevention programming within an entity (such as a college/school) and their involvement is necessary for the implementation of the project, then the entity involved should provide a letter of support to show evidence of an existing commitment and relationship between the main applicant and the collaboration. 

An example of a partnership is a relationship that is not necessary to the development and implementation of the project, however it enriches the project by providing helpful expertise, perspective, or resources that may not be known to the applicant organization. A partnership may include a situation in which the applicant organization reaches out to an entity (such as a college/school) or individual for input, feedback, and the opportunity to participate in a project, but without the same level of formalized expectations set forth in a collaboration. Being inclusive of partners demonstrates a desire to listen to, and respond to, community needs through the project. 

In the application, applicants are required to describe both collaborations and partnerships that will support and/or be a part of the project. (See Attachment A: Application Form, Question 7.) Applicants should describe the proposed collaborator(s)/partner(s), what the collaboration(s)/partnership(s) will entail, and the nature of current relationships with collaborator(s)/partner(s). 

Letters of support are only required for proposing multi-organization collaborations. The purpose of letters of support is to provide evidence of an existing commitment and relationship between the main applicant and the collaborator. 

Question: Should the required submission documents be submitted individually or as a single packet? 

A: Applicants should email the submission documents as separate documents, not as a single document. 

Question: How broad are the priority areas of "creating protective environments" and "promoting social norms that protect against violence"? Our organization works to make more inclusive school environments for LGBTQ+ youth who are at high risk for sexual violence, but our programming is not specifically about sexual violence (except for some healthy relationships trainings). 

A: The three priority areas in the RFP can be interpreted broadly. The example given of creating inclusive school environments for LGBTQ+ youth fits within the priority areas of the RFP. Applicants should describe how their proposed project/program will help prevent sexual violence. However, the project/program itself does not need to explicitly discuss sexual violence in order to be considered prevention. See pages 10 – 11 of the RFP for further details about the three priority areas. 

Question: In the budget scoring, which is worth up to 15 possible points, what are some specific criteria that will result in higher or lower scores? 

A: Please see Attachment D which includes scoring criteria. This attachment describes what the rating levels mean and how the review team will apply the scoring criteria. 

Question: How many letters of support can be added?  

A: There is not a limit to the number of letters of support. However, applicants do not need to submit letters of support unless their proposals include formal collaborations, such as in the case of a multi-organization collaboration. 

Question: If we plan to work within individual schools within a school system, but not sharing funds (per se). Would that qualify as a collaboration or a partnership? And if it is a partnership, would it not require a letter of support? 

A: The designation of partner or collaborator depends on the nature of the relationship. Funding is not necessary in order for something to be considered a collaboration. 

A multi-organization collaboration involves stronger and more formalized relationships than a partnership. Organizations might be considered collaborators if the project could not happen without their specific involvement. For instance, if an applicant proposes to implement prevention programming within an entity (such as an individual school) and their involvement is necessary for the implementation of the project, then the entity involved should provide a letter of support to show evidence of an existing commitment and relationship between the main applicant and the collaboration. 

An example of a partnership is a relationship that is not necessary to the development and implementation of the project, however it enriches the project by providing helpful expertise, perspective, or resources that may not be known to the applicant organization. A partnership may include a situation in which the applicant organization reaches out to an entity (such as an individual school) or individual for input, feedback, and the opportunity to participate in a project, but without the same level of formalized expectations set forth in a collaboration. Being inclusive of partners demonstrates a desire to listen to, and respond to, community needs through the project. 

In the application, applicants are required to describe both collaborations and partnerships that will support and/or be a part of the project. (See Attachment A: Application Form, Question 7.) Applicants should describe the proposed collaborator(s)/partner(s), what the collaboration(s)/partnership(s) will entail, and the nature of current relationships with collaborator(s)/partner(s).  

Letters of support are only required for proposing multi-organization collaborations. The purpose of letters of support is to provide evidence of an existing commitment and relationship between the main applicant and the collaborator. 

Based on the information provided in this question, it is likely that this relationship would qualify as a collaboration, regardless of whether or not the school will receive funds, and a letter of support from the school and/or school system should be included with the application. The reason this qualifies as a collaboration is because the program described could not function without the school, since the school is where the program would be implemented. 

Question: One of our programs is about employment (i.e. the MN Family Investment Program). If we wanted to include programming for sexual violence prevention and harassment in the workplace, would that be eligible? 

A: Yes, this would be eligible. Employment is considered to be a method to strengthen economic supports, which is a priority area in the grant. Strengthening sexual violence prevention in the workplace falls into the priority area about creating protective environments. See pages 10 –11 of the RFP for further details about the three priority areas. See pages 14 – 15 to review eligible/ineligible expenses. 

Question: Is there any kind of priority given to "new" programming/positions versus existing programming/positions? 

A: Selection criteria is detailed in Attachment D. There is no scoring benefit to proposing a new versus existing program/position. 

Question: We have two different programs with two different goals/outcomes that would "fit" the grant criteria. Would it be appropriate to apply for the grant outlining both programs or just one focus area? 

A: Applicants are allowed to submit multiple applications. Applicants should submit separate applications for each unrelated or distinct program or project. See page 7 of the RFP for information about multiple applications. However please also note that funding amounts and the number of grant awards available is limited. It is up to applicants to decide if two projects are related and connected enough that one application would work well to propose both programs. 

Question: Can I apply even if I am a registered nonprofit in Fargo, North Dakota and also received approval as a nonprofit (foreign) in Moorhead, Minnesota? 

A: Eligible applicants should be based in Minnesota and include reach to some part of the state. This means that applicants should be physically located in Minnesota. Applicants based outside of Minnesota are able to be part of a multi-organization collaboration with the main applicant being located in Minnesota. Page 6 of the RFP includes more information on eligible applicants and collaborations. 

Question: I see that hotlines are an exception for direct client services. What is your definition of a hotline? We have an Action Line that assists victims/survivors directly along with advocates and other professionals who work with victim/survivors. 

A: Hotlines are eligible as long as they focus on sexual violence primary prevention and health equity and meet the other requirements of the RFP, such as the priority areas and levels of change. Applicants are encouraged to read the following sections of the RFP: 

Priority Areas: Pages 10 – 11 of the RFP provide information about the three grant priority areas, which are strengthen economic supports for individuals and families; create protective environments; and promote social norms that protect against violence. 
Levels of Change: Page 12 of the RFP provides information about the levels of change (i.e. individual level, community level, and societal level). Activities that target community-level change and/or societal-level change will be scored higher than activities that target only individual-level change. 

Question: Our violence prevention and intervention work stems from a dual program for domestic and sexual violence. Sexual assault is usually included as part of the definition of domestic violence. How does Minnesota Department of Health feel about including domestic violence prevention along with sexual violence prevention as long as sexual violence prevention is our primary effort? We plan to apply for a grant for a Community Educator position that will focus on promoting social norms that protect against violence.

A: Different forms of violence, including domestic and sexual violence, are interconnected and share many of the same root causes. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Connecting the dots describes the benefits of using a cross-cutting approach to address multiple forms of violence. It also provides examples of risk and protective factors that have been found to affect multiple forms of violence.

The goal of the Sexual Violence Prevention Grant Program is to support activities that stop sexual violence from occurring. Applicants are allowed to propose activities that will also prevent domestic violence but should focus on sexual violence prevention for this RFP. Including domestic violence prevention in an application will not affect scoring positively or negatively. However, explaining how the proposed intervention aligns with the goal of preventing sexual violence is a key component of a successful application. It is recommended that applicants review Attachment D: Application Scoring Criteria (Word).

Question: I am an LLC in Minnesota - not a 501c3. Am I eligible to apply for this grant?

A: Yes, for profit entities, such as LLCs, are eligible to apply for the grant.

Question: Would community groups and classes, such as those focusing on survivors of violence and parents from specific survivor communities, be eligible for this grant if the activities contribute to sexual violence prevention?

A: Community groups and classes are eligible for this grant. Applicants should refer to Section 2.1 of the RFP (pages 9 – 14) to ensure proposed activities align with the priorities of the grant. 

Question: When you specify that “Clinical care (except as allowed by law)” is an ineligible expense, what kinds of clinical care would be reimbursable as allowed by law for this opportunity? Are otherwise-billable clinical expenses completely ineligible?

A: Clinical care is not an eligible expense for this RFP. This language comes from guidance in the original Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In the case of this RFP, applicants must adhere to Section 393B of the Public Health Service Act [42 U.S.C. 280b-1c], which specifies the use of these funds for rape prevention and education purposes, not treatment. For this reason, clinical care is not an eligible expense for these funds.

Please review Section 2.2: Eligible Projects (page 14) of the RFP for a list of eligible expenses.

Please also refer to Section 2.1 of the RFP (pages 9 – 14) to ensure proposed activities align with the priorities of the grant. 

Question: We noticed that the indirect costs of this grant was capped at 5%, whereas the federal indirect costs will be increasing from 10% to 15% in October 2024. Since this funding comes from the CDC’s RPE federal funds, will the indirect costs in this grant change to match the new changes on the federal level?

A: The 5% limit is a Congressional legislative limit on administrative expenses. Section 393B of the Public Health Service Act [42 U.S.C. 280b-1c]. Per CDC instructions, this limit replaces an indirect cost rate and sets the limit at 5% of total received in a fiscal year. We have received no instruction that this limit on administrative expenses will be changing. Should a change occur, we will review and communicate the relevant budget implications within the context of CDC and MDH guidelines.

Question: Our organization just received a Google Ad Grant for $10,000 per month in free ads. Like many other Twin Cities nonprofits, we are finding the Google system extremely challenging and aspire to hire a contractor on retainer for a few months to help us administer the grant. We'd be able to target ad campaigns specifically promoting education and prevention. Would paying a contractor for this purpose be an acceptable use of the funds from this grant initiative?

A: Without more information on the duties that will be assigned to this contractor, we cannot determine whether or not this would be an acceptable use of funds.

Eligible expenses for this grant can be found in Section 2.2: Eligible Projects (page 14) of the RFP. Eligible expenses include reasonable program purposes, which includes personnel. It also includes planning, implementation, and evaluation of activities designed to prevent sexual violence by promoting health equity. In review, MDH SVPP will be seeking to ensure that the work of a contractor is directly focused on planning, implementing, and evaluating the work under this funding as opposed to general and/or unrelated projects.

Applicants should refer to Section 2.1 of the RFP (pages 9 – 14) to ensure proposed activities align with the priorities of the grant. 

Question: Our media corporation is a legally registered media here in Minnesota. We have a nonprofit status. One of the areas of our focus is raising the awareness of our community on sexual violence. We work on programs that encourage victims to come out and speak their stories and others can learn from them. We also invite experts on the field that can provide advice to our community. 

We are looking for a fund to broaden our work in this area. We are interested to apply for the grant application you have advertised. Are you still accepting applications? Can we apply? 

A: Proposals are due no later than 11:59 p.m. Central Time on Friday, May 17.

Media corporations are eligible to apply. Please see Section 1.4: Eligible applicants (page 6) of the RFP to review eligibility requirements. 

Please also refer to Section 2.1 of the RFP (pages 9 – 14) to ensure proposed activities align with the priorities of the grant. 

Question: Our organization serves the Midwest (Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan). We have staff located in Indiana, Wisconsin, and here in Minnesota. However, we do not have a Minnesota Tax ID. I am physically located here in the state and oversee our work in Minnesota, but our approach would include personnel of two staff located in Indiana. Are we eligible to apply?

A: The purpose of this RFP is to support sexual violence prevention work that is focused on activities occurring within and benefiting Minnesota specifically.

Eligible applicants should be based in Minnesota and include reach to some part of the state. This means that applicants should be physically located in Minnesota. Applicants based outside of Minnesota are able to be part of a multi-organization collaboration with the main applicant being located in Minnesota. Page 6 of the RFP includes more information on eligible applicants and collaborations.

Question: I am preparing our Due Diligence form for the MDH Sexual Violence Prevention Grant, but I wondered if you wanted that form filled out for the actual office requesting funds as opposed to the full University since that wouldn't be reflective of the office responsible for the work outlined in the proposal? 

A: The applicant may decide to focus their due diligence form on the actual office requesting funds, or the full University, depending on their own internal policy and practices. If the applicant is selected to receive grant funds, MDH SVPP may request additional information.