2022 Request for Concept Notes - Continuity of Humanitarian Operations during the COVID-19 Pandemic | SFOP0008436

Opportunity Information: Apply for SFOP0008436

The 2022 Request for Concept Notes - Continuity of Humanitarian Operations during the COVID-19 Pandemic (Funding Opportunity Number SFOP0008436) was a U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) discretionary grant opportunity issued on November 19, 2021, with concept notes due by January 20, 2022. It was offered as a cooperative agreement, meaning the government expected an ongoing, collaborative role with the recipient during implementation rather than a purely hands-off grant. The opportunity was limited to eligible U.S. nonprofits with IRS 501(c)(3) status (excluding institutions of higher education). PRM anticipated making one award, with a maximum (award ceiling) of $300,000, under CFDA 19.522.

The core purpose of the opportunity was not simply to fund routine humanitarian programming, but to capture and assess how humanitarian organizations adapted their operations to keep essential services running during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in refugee and displacement settings where constraints were severe and needs remained high. The requested concept notes were expected to describe, in practical and evidence-based terms, the methods organizations used to maintain continuity of services and operations under pandemic restrictions, and to compare which approaches ended up being most beneficial. In other words, PRM was looking for clear operational lessons learned: what changed, why it changed, and what worked best under real-world conditions.

A central focus was on the operational methods used to maintain continuity, such as shifting service delivery models, modifying field operations, and introducing risk mitigation procedures. The opportunity explicitly asked applicants to identify the methods used during the pandemic, then assess their relative value and effectiveness. This naturally points toward strategies like remote management, decentralized programming through local partners, appointment-based or staggered service delivery to reduce crowding, use of mobile outreach or smaller community-based distribution points, and greater reliance on digital tools for communication, case management, feedback, and coordination. The grant also signaled interest in determining which of these adaptations were most beneficial in practice, whether because they protected health while maintaining quality, improved coverage, reduced downtime, maintained accountability to affected populations, or proved cost-effective and scalable.

Equity and differential impact were also built into the request. PRM wanted applicants to analyze whether some populations were affected more than others as a result of the new methods deployed. That includes situations where remote or technology-supported services helped some groups while leaving others behind, for example people without phones or connectivity, older adults, persons with disabilities, women and girls facing mobility or safety constraints, people with limited literacy, or households in more isolated areas. The question was framed to surface unintended consequences and access barriers created by pandemic-era adaptations, as well as any mitigation steps that organizations took to keep services inclusive.

The opportunity also required a candid accounting of what could not be sustained. Applicants were asked which activities or services were discontinued due to health and safety concerns, if any, reflecting the reality that certain high-contact or group-based interventions were often paused or reduced during outbreaks and lockdowns. This could include large in-person trainings, group psychosocial support sessions, mass registration events, community meetings, or other activities that risked crowding. Importantly, PRM was not only interested in what stopped, but in how organizations handled those gaps: the solicitation asked whether new services or activities were created to substitute for discontinued ones, and if so, whether those substitutes were successful. That places emphasis on adaptive programming, such as replacing group sessions with one-on-one check-ins, moving information sharing to radio or SMS channels, shifting distribution approaches to reduce contact, or creating new referral pathways that functioned even when offices were closed.

Another major theme was workforce presence and duty-of-care. The request specifically asked which staff were physically present during the pandemic response and what provisions were made for their health and safety, with examples including international staff, local staff, and community volunteers. This indicates PRM wanted a detailed picture of how organizations balanced continuity of operations with staff protection, including how roles were reorganized between remote and in-person work, what protective measures were used for those who continued field presence, and how organizations managed staffing constraints tied to travel restrictions, quarantine requirements, or illness. It also suggests attention to the different risk profiles and support needs across staff categories, particularly community volunteers and local staff who often maintained frontline delivery when international travel was restricted.

In sum, this PRM concept note request was designed to produce actionable, field-grounded learning about pandemic-era continuity in humanitarian operations: the concrete operational adaptations used, the comparative effectiveness of those adaptations, the populations who benefited or were disadvantaged by new delivery models, the services that were paused for safety reasons, the substitute services that emerged in response, and the practical measures taken to keep essential personnel safe while maintaining humanitarian assistance. The award structure (one cooperative agreement up to $300,000) indicates a targeted effort to support a focused project that could synthesize these operational experiences into findings useful for future public health emergencies and other disruptions to humanitarian access and service delivery.

• The Department of State, Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration in the other (see text field entitled explanation of other category of funding activity for clarification) sector is offering a public funding opportunity titled "2022 Request for Concept Notes - Continuity of Humanitarian Operations during the COVID-19 Pandemic" and is now available to receive applicants.
• Interested and eligible applicants and submit their applications by referencing the CFDA number(s): 19.522.
• This funding opportunity was created on Nov 19, 2021.
• Applicants must submit their applications by Jan 20, 2022. (Agency may still review applications by suitable applicants for the remaining/unused allocated funding in 2026.)
• Each selected applicant is eligible to receive up to $300,000.00 in funding.
• The number of recipients for this funding is limited to 1 candidate(s).
• Eligible applicants include: Nonprofits having a 501(c)(3) status with the IRS, other than institutions of higher education.

Apply for SFOP0008436

[Watch] Creating a grant proposal using the step-by-step wizard inside the applicant portal: