Page images
PDF
EPUB

needed to more thoroughly integrate aspects of international education into curriculum throughout a student's undergraduate or graduate career. The NSEP encourages institutions to address these overall international education curriculum issues in their proposals.

(4) Provide opportunities to increase demand for study of foreign areas and languages. Efforts to develop educational programs that offer innovative approaches to increasing demand to include a meaningful international component are encouraged. Proposals are encouraged to address issues of diversity: how to attract students who have historically not pursued opportunities involving international education. Diversity includes geographical, racial, ethnic, and gender factors.

(5) Improve faculty credentials in international education. Efforts to create more opportunities for teachers to become competent in foreign cultures and languages are encouraged. While NSEP is a higher education program, it is interested in the potential dynamics of collaborative efforts that recognize the shared responsibility of all educational levels for promoting international education.

(6) Uses of new technologies. During the last decade tremendous advances have been made in the application of new educational technologies. Such technologies have enhanced our capacity to improve instruction, broaden access, and assess student learning. NSEP's objective is not to support large technology oriented projects. However, NSEP encourages efforts that integrate innovative uses of technology emphasizing how proposed programs will have significance beyond a local setting. Proposals that include proposed uses of technology will be required to demonstrate detailed knowledge of the technology, how it is to be developed and applied and how student learning will be impacted.

§206.4 Proposal development and review.

The purpose of this section is to explain the NSEP review process. [NOTE: A number of important approaches to proposal development and review have been adapted from guidelines developed

by the Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education for its "Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)".] This information if intended to aid institutions in the development of proposals and to provide guidance concerning the criteria that may be used in reviewing and evaluating proposals.

(a) The grants to institutions program will be administered by the National Security Education Program Office (NSEPO). However, the NSEPO will function as an administrative office much in the same manner as the Institute of International Education and the Academy for Educational Development function in administering NSEP scholarship and fellowship programs, respectively. The NSEPO will not review or evaluate proposals. The proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by national screening panels.

(b) The NSEP will use a two-stage review process in order to evaluate a broad range of proposal ideas. In the first stage, applicants will submit a five-page summary (double-spaced) of their proposal. An institution may submit more than one proposal, but each proposal should be submitted and will be evaluated separately and independently.

(c) NSEP expects competition for grants to be intense. By implementing a two-stage process, potential grantees are given an opportunity to present their ideas without creating a paperwork burden on both the proposal authors and the reviewers.

(d) The preliminary review process. The review of preliminary proposals will be undertaken by panels of external reviewers, not members of the NSEPO. Panels of not less than three will be assembled to review preliminary proposals. Panel members will be drawn primarily from faculty and administration in higher education but might also include representatives from the research, business, and government communities. Every effort will be made to ensure balance (geographical, ethnic, gender, institutional type, subject matter) across the entire competition.

(e) Panel members will reflect the nature of the grants program. Each panel will include a recognized expert in a field of international education.

190-117 D-00--12

Other panelists may include experts in area studies, foreign language education, and other fields and disciplines with an international focus.

(f) Preliminary proposals will be reviewed according to a set of criteria developed in consultation with representatives from higher education, and provided to the panels. The applicant shall, at a minimum, deal with the following issues in the preliminary proposal:

(1) How the proposal addresses issues of national capacity in international education.

(2) What area(s), language(s), and discipline(s) the proposal addresses and the importance of these to U.S. national capacity.

(3) What the applicant is proposing to do.

(4) How the proposal deals with the key characteristics of the NSEP.

of thorough

(5) Demonstration knowledge of the state of the art in the particular area of the proposal and how this proposal develops or builds capacity, not duplicates existing capacity.

(g) The applicant must also include a budget estimate. This budget estimate, for the first year of the proposal, must include the following:

(1) A summary of anticipated direct costs including professional salaries, funds for students, travel, materials and supplies, consultants, etc., and how or why these costs are needed.

(2) An estimate of institutional indirect costs. The budget estimate must also indicate whether funding is also being requested for a second year and, if so, an estimate of the amount to be requested.

(h) Panelists will review and rank proposals and forward their recommendations to the NSEPO. NSEPO will review and analyze these recommendations and inform all applicants of decisions.

§ 206.5 Final proposal process.

NSEPO will provide detailed comments on proposals to all applicants who are invited to prepare a final proposal.

(a) Final proposals should be limited to no more than 25 double-spaced pages. Proposals will be reviewed by national panels constructed similarly

to those designed to review prelimi nary proposals. In addition to a field review process, panelists will be assembled in Washington D.C. to discuss and review the independent and competing merits of proposals.

(b) Proposals will be evaluated in two basic categories:

(1) Proposals that address study abroad infrastructure and

(2) Proposals that address domestic infrastructure. Should proposals deal with both of these issues, they will be evaluated in a third category. This grouping of proposals will ensure that all categories of proposals receive funding consideration.

(c) In general, final proposals will be considered on the following selection criteria:

(1) Importance of the problem. Each proposal will be evaluated according to the merit of how it addresses issue(s) of national capacity. The proposal must articulate the importance of the problem it addresses, how the proposal addresses issues of national capacity in international education, and how it is consistent with the objectives of the NSEP.

(2) Importance of proposed foreign language(s), foreign area(s), field(s) or discipline(s). The proposal will be evaluated according to how well it articulates the need for programs in the proposed areas, languages, fields, or disciplines.

(3) Identification of need and gaps shortfalls. The proposal will be eval ated according to its persuasiveness in identifying where the needs exist and where serious shortfalls exist in the capacity to fill the need. The proposal should clearly identify why these gaps exist and provide a strong indication of familiarity with the state of the field in the proposal area.

(4) Cost effectiveness. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of "educational value for the dollar." NSEP is interested in funding proposals in areas where other funding is limited or in areas where NSEP funding can signifi cantly augment or complement other sources. NSEP is not interested in replacing funds available from other sources or in duplicating other efforts. Also, NSEP is interested in projects whose dollar levels and long-range

budget plans provide for realistic continuation by the grantee institution and adaptation by other institutions. NSEP is interested in proposed approaches to leveraging other funds against the proposed project.

(5) Evaluation plans. Proposals will be evaluated on their approach to measuring impact. What impact will the proposed program have on national capacity? How will the proposed program deal with assessing language and foreign cultural competency? In the case of study abroad programs, how will the success and impact of study abroad experiences be assessed. Proposals should not defer the consideration of these issues to a latter stage of the effort. Evaluation and assessment should be an integral part of the entire proposal effort.

(6) Prospects for wider impact. Proposals must address national needs and will be evaluated according to how well they are likely to address these needs. What component of the higher education community does the proposal address? How diverse a student population will the proposed program address? What applications to other institutions will be made available, either directly or indirectly, because of the proposed program?

(7) Capacity and commitment of the applicant. The proposal will be evaluated according to the evidence provided on the commitment of the institution, and other institutions, to the proposed project. What other institutions are involved and what is their commitment. If there are commitments from foreign institutions, what is the evidence of this commitment? Are their plans for the institution to integrate the efforts of the proposed program into the educational process? What plans are there for eventual self-support? As with many other similar programs, NSEP is particularly interested in the degree to which the institution is willing to bear a reasonable share of the direct and indirect costs of the proposed project.

(d) Applicants should also indicate if they currently receive or are seeking support from other sources. Applicants should indicate why support from NSEP is appropriate, if other sources are also being sought.

[blocks in formation]

$210.2 Applicability and scope.

(a) The provisions of this part apply to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Unified and Specified Commands, and the Defense Agencies.

(b) The provisions encompass all persons who operate or control a motor vehicle or otherwise use the streets of a military installation over which the United States exercises exclusive or concurrent legislative jurisdiction.

(c) The provisions govern only vehicular and traffic offenses or infractions that cannot be assimilated under 18 U.S.C. 13, thereby precluding application of state laws to traffic offenses committed on military installations.

1 Copies may be obtained, at cost, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

$210.3 Policy.

(a) It is the policy of the Department of Defense that an effective, comprehensive traffic safety program be established and maintained at all military installations as prescribed in DoD Directive 6055.4.1

(b) State vehicular and pedestrian traffic laws that are now or may hereafter be in effect shall be expressly adopted and made applicable on military installations to the extent provided by this part. All persons on a military installation shall comply with the vehicular and pedestrian traffic laws of the state in which the installation is located.

(c) Pursuant to the authority established in the Enclosure 1 to DoD Directive 5525.42, installation commanders of all DoD installations in the United States and over which the United States has exclusive or concurrent legislative jurisdiction are delegated the authority to establish additional vehicular and pedestrian traffic rules and regulations for their installations. All persons on a military installation shall comply with locally established vehicular and pedestrian traffic rules and regulations.

(d) A person found guilty of violating, on a military installation, any state vehicular or pedestrian traffic law or local installation vehicular or pedestrian traffic rule or regulation made applicable to the installation under the provisions of this part is subject to a fine of not more than $50 or imprisonment for not more than 30 days, or both, for each violation (40 U.S.C. 318c).

(e) A copy of this part shall be posted in an appropriate place on the DoD installation concerned.

[46 FR 58306, Dec. 1, 1981, as amended at 56 FR 13285, Apr. 1, 1991; 56 FR 42939, Aug. 30, 1991]

$210.4 Responsibilities.

(a) The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Logistics) shall modify this part as appropriate.

(b) Secretaries of the Military Departments shall comply with this part.

2 See footnote 1 to §210.1.

Sec.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

PART 211-DOD FOREIGN TAX RELIEF PROGRAM

211.1 Reissuance and purpose. 211.2 Applicability and scope. 211.3 Definitions.

211.4 Policy.

211.5 Responsibilities. 211.6 Country tax law studies. 211.7 Information requirements. AUTHORITY: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 10 U.S.C. 133. SOURCE: 44 FR 50598, Aug. 29, 1979, unless otherwise noted.

$211.1 Reissuance and purpose.

This part (a) is reissued without substantive change, to correct superseded references; and (b) defines the tax relief policy of the Department of Defense, designates the organizational element which has continuing responsibility for the overall direction of the DoD Foreign Tax Relief Program, delineates the responsibilities of other organizational elements to implement and monitor the program, and requires the preparation and maintenance of specified foreign country tax law studies in order to facilitate the institution of statistical reporting procedures.

$211.2 Applicability and scope.

(a) The provisions of this part apply to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Military Departments, the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Unified Command, and the Defense Agencies (hereafter referred to as "DoD Components").

(b) The policy set forth in this part applies to:

(1) Military functions expenditures by the Department of Defense, and

(2) Expenditures by nonappropriated fund activities of the Department Defense that are subject to taxes imposed by:

(i) Foreign countries in which U.S. military forces are regularly stationed (other than attache and other military personnel assigned to a U.S. diplomatic mission); and

(ii) Any other foreign country in which all or most U.S. defense activities, in a collective sense, are conducted in the interest of the common

[ocr errors][merged small]

defense or otherwise significantly improve the military security of that country.

(c) The policy set forth in this part also applies to Military Assistance Program (MAP) expenditures in all countries.

$211.3 Definitions.

(a) Regardless of how a charge is denominated in foreign law or regulation, the words "tax" and "taxes" include all direct or indirect foreign customs duties, import and export taxes, excises, fees and other charges imposed at the national, local or intermediate level of a foreign country other than charges for services rendered or for other consideration received.

(b) For example, taxes include but are not limited to purchase tax, sales tax, use tax, gross receipts tax, stamp tax, transfer tax, transaction tax, turnover tax, value added tax, service tax, trade tax, business tax, license tax, transportation tax, circulation tax, luxury tax, possession tax, production tax, registration tax, consumption tax, gasoline tax, real property tax, personal property tax, and gross income tax.

(c) The word "relief" includes any method, technique, or procedure by which the ultimate economic burden of a tax on DoD funds may be avoided or otherwise remedied, such as exemption, refund, or drawback.

$211.4 Policy.

It is the policy of the Department of Defense to secure, to the maximum extent practicable, effective relief from all foreign taxes wherever the ultimate economic burden of those taxes would, in the absence of such relief, be borne by funds appropriated or allocated to the Department of Defense (including MAP appropriations) or under the control of its nonappropriated fund activities. In those cases in which the total economic burden of a tax not readily identifiable in the normal course of business is so small that it may be considered a de minimis matter, or in which the administrative burden of securing effective relief from a tax in a particular instance would be out of proportion to the amount of the relief ob

tained, tax relief shall be considered impracticable.

$211.5 Responsibilities.

(a) The General Counsel of the Department of Defense shall:

(1) Provide overall supervision and direction of the DoD Foreign Tax Relief Program.

(2) Resolve any significant issues relating to the program.

(3) Designate those countries that come within §211.2(b)(2)(ii) of this part.

(4) Direct the preparation of country tax law studies for countries not within the scope of § 211.2(b) of this part.

(5) Designate the DoD member of the Inter-Agency Committee on Foreign Tax Relief, established by the Department of State.

(b) The Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Affairs) shall monitor the negotiation and conclusion of international agreements subject to the Secretary's approval authority under DoD Instruction 2050.1 Delegated Approval Authority to Negotiate and Conclude International Agreements, July 6, 1977,1 to ensure that such agreements are compatible with the policy set forth in this part and any implementing guidance concerning that policy issued by the General Counsel of the Department of Defense.

(c) The Chairman, Defense Acquisition Regulatory Council, shall coordinate with the General Counsel of the Department of Defense before the issuance, amendment, or revision of any portion of the Defense Acquisition Regulatory System (or regulation, directive, circular, or other publication within the scope of 32 CFR part 160 that pertains to the implementation of the DoD Foreign Tax Relief Program.

(d) The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) shall perform such fiscal functions as may be required to implement the DoD Foreign Tax Relief Program, including advice and assistance in the institution of procedures for collecting data, compiling reports, and performing internal audits.

(e) The Secretary of each of the Military Departments and the Director of each of the Defense Agencies shall issue

1 See footnote 1 to § 209.5(d).

« PreviousContinue »