FAQ: Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program

This Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document serves as a resource for MIECHV awardees in developing applications in response to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Notice of Funding Opportunity. Awardees are advised to fully read the FY24 NOFO (PDF - 706 KB) in its entirety for complete information.

Additional resources

Technical Assistance Webinar – recording of the March 19th webinar outlining instructions and helpful hints to avoid common pitfalls.
TA Resource Tables – These are optional resources awardees may use as templates to fill out required attachments when submitting their applications. Awardees should have received these resource tables as attachments in the communication sent through HRSA’s Electronic Handbooks (EHBs) on or around February 29, 2024.
EHBs Applicant User Guide (PDF) – This guide will provide detailed instructions on how to access and submit the FY24 NOFO application through the EHBs.
Matching Funds FAQs – You can find a list of FAQs about matching funds on the MIECHV Reauthorization webpage.

Funding and eligibility

How much total funding is available for FY24 MIECHV Base and Matching Grant Awards? Who is eligible to apply?

Up to $447,150,000 ($406,500,000 in base funds and $40,650,000 in matching funds) is available for FY24 MIECHV Base and Matching Grant Awards.

Eligible applicants include the 56 eligible entities that currently receive FY23 MIECHV base grant funding to continue to deliver and expand coordinated and comprehensive high-quality, and voluntary early childhood home visiting services to eligible families. Nonprofit organizations that provide services in states or jurisdictions that did not apply for and receive MIECHV Program – Base Grant Award funding in FY23 are also eligible to apply in FY24 so long as the state, territory, or jurisdiction funded in FY23 continues not to apply under this funding opportunity.

How were award ceiling amounts calculated?

In accordance with the Social Security Act, Title V, § 511(c)(4), as amended by Section 6101 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328), the following formula is applied to FY24 funding available to states, nonprofit organizations, and territories:

Base Funding – We calculated the base funding according to each state or jurisdiction’s share of children under the age of 5. We used the most recent U.S. Census data available before FY23 to determine this share.1 2

Guard Rails – In an effort to maintain stability, the total amount for which an applicant may apply was adjusted, where appropriate, to ensure that any available recipient funding does not fluctuate by more than 10 percent from each awardees’ FY21 award. Any funds remaining after the guardrails were applied were redistributed on a proportional basis to each grant recipient.

There is a $1.0 million minimum base amount awarded to recipients.

Matching Funding – Matching fund allocations are determined by each awardee’s share of children under age 5 whose families have incomes below the poverty line, using the most recent U.S. Census data. Matching funding amounts are based on a statutory formula that sets a maximum federal matching allocation, which increases each fiscal year.

Applicants must meet the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements to be eligible to receive base funds. Applicants also meet the MOE requirements and obligate non-federal matching funds to be eligible to receive federal matching funds. See the MIECHV Reauthorization webpage for more information on MOE requirements.

What is sequestration of the federal budget? What would happen if MIECHV funds were sequestered? How much is sequestration for FY24?

Sequestration is a budget enforcement tool Congress uses to reduce federal spending in order to meet established budget ceiling amounts. Typically, reductions are applied in a uniform percentage to appropriations annually and may vary from year-to-year. Sequestration applies to FY24 appropriations; the base and matching grant allocations will be reduced by 5.7% to reflect funding availability.

How much can eligible entities request?

Eligible entities may not request more than the total base grant award ceiling for their state or jurisdiction, and may choose to request less. For matching grants, eligible entities may request any amount up to the full allocation, commensurate with their available qualifying non-federal funds.

Applicants can apply for an award amount of up to $725,892 in federal matching funds and demonstrate that they will meet the requirements outlined in the NOFO with respect to obligations of non-Federal and Federal funds. Awardees that apply for matching funds but contribute less than $241,964 in non-federal funds will see further adjustments to their federal matching funds award to reflect their reduced contribution.

Award ceiling amounts for each eligible entity were sent via the HRSA Electronic Handbooks (EHBs) to MIECHV Program Directors and Authorizing Officials on February 29, 2024.

When will awards be issued?

HRSA expects to issue Notices of Award prior to the project period start date of September 30, 2024.

What dates are the period of performance?

The period of performance, also called the project period, extends from September 30, 2024, to September 29, 2026.

Application submission

Where can I obtain a copy of the FY24 NOFO?: The FY24 NOFO (PDF - 706 KB) is accessible via EHBs.
When are applications due?: The application deadline is Wednesday, May 29, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. HRSA suggests submitting applications at least 3 business days before the deadline to allow for any unforeseen circumstances. Applications must be complete, within the specified 60-page limit, validated by EHBs under HRSA-24-049, and submitted prior to the deadline to be considered under this notice.
What is the activity code for this grant award?: The activity code for this grant is X10.

Project narrative

What are the major changes made in FY24?

Please note the following changes for FY24:

Program Requirements and Expectations are no longer distributed throughout the NOFO guidance. Instead, they are consolidated in Appendix A, which is linked to throughout the instructions. This change is intended to streamline and improve readability while focusing on the submission requirement.
Reauthorization changed the funding formula and the way award ceiling amounts are calculated. Awardees will now receive one award that consists of base funds, and, if they choose to apply for such funds, federal matching funds.
Matching funds were introduced with reauthorization. For additional information on matching funds, see the MIECHV Program Reauthorization webpage.
In line with new statutory requirements, the FY24 NOFO includes a place where awardees express their interest in FY26 additional matching grant funds, should any be available.
Awardees are no longer required to report on recipient-level infrastructure expenditures. MIECHV awardees must plan to use at least 75% of their federal award on service delivery expenditures to deliver targeted and intensive home visiting services to families in the MIECHV communities they serve.
New information and guidance around virtual home visiting has been included in the FY24 NOFO. For additional information, please see Appendix A of the NOFO and the MIECHV Reauthorization webpage.
The Glossary of Selected Terms (Appendix B) has been expanded to include definitions for non-federal funds, virtual home visiting, and service delivery expenditures.
Any MIECHV eligible entity can propose program evaluation in their FY24 NOFO application, through Coordinated State Evaluation, even if the entity has not yet participated in evaluation.
Removal of prior required data submission to DGIS to streamline performance data collection and to facilitate a reduction in awardee burden.
HRSA has created additional optional TA templates for awardee use. Please reach out to your Project Officer if you did not receive the optional TA templates.
- Additional TA templates have been created for the required Attachment 3: Staffing Plan, Attachment 5: Administrative Cost Detail, and Attachment 6: Written Agreements.
- An optional budget narrative has also been created to support the budget narrative information. There is a blank template with instructions, as well as a filled-in example for awardees to review and use.

What changes have been made to the FY24 NOFO to reduce administrative burden?

HRSA is working to implement strategies to reduce administrative burden. HRSA has made several changes to the FY24 NOFO to work towards this goal, which include the following highlights:

For ease of use for the NOFO, as well as continued use for program guidance, all Program Requirements and Expectations have been pulled from throughout the project narrative and into a single appendix, Appendix A.
The Pay for Outcomes requirements have been removed from the NOFO and are linked to the Supplemental Information Request (SIR) (PDF - 626 KB) on the HRSA Website.
Awardees are no longer required to report on recipient-level infrastructure expenditures.
Awardees are no longer required to submit DGIS data.
The Period of Availability Chart (formerly Attachment 3) has been removed as a requirement for the FY24 NOFO.

How can I request an exception to the 10% limit of funding expended on administrative costs?

Statute has defined a 10% limit on funds used to cover the costs of administration, and allows for an exception for up to 15% of funds to be used for the costs of administration if an awardee meets at least one of three possible criteria: 1) directly provide home visits to eligible families and without a subrecipient; 2) are in the process of expanding to new communities identified through their needs assessment; or 3) are new to administering the MIECHV award within the past three years.

If an awardee anticipates incurring administrative costs greater than 10% of their total award, meet one of these three criteria above, and wish to request an exception to the limit on administrative costs, the awardee must explicitly describe why they are requesting an exception in Attachment 5: Administrative Cost Detail.

What if I do not have any administrative expenditures in a specific cost category?

If awardees use the optional Attachment 5 to report their administrative cost detail, and they do not have any administrative expenditures for a specific object class (cost) category, leave the relevant rows in Column D blank. If awardees do not use the optional Attachment 5, indicate in the description that they do not have administrative expenditures for that specific cost category.

What are the current HomVEE models eligible for MIECHV funding?

This year, a total of 24 evidence-based models meet the Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) criteria for early childhood home visiting service delivery models and are eligible for MIECHV funding.

What is in a complete FY24 NOFO submission?

HRSA requires applicants to apply electronically through EHBs.

A complete submission includes four parts:

The first is completion of a standard OMB form: SF-424 Instructions for Application for Federal Assistance.

The remaining parts of the application must be uploaded under the applicable section:

FY24 Project Narrative
FY24 Budget Narrative
Attachments
- Note: There are seven required attachments for all applications this year. All other attachments should be submitted, as applicable.

How do I find the Congressional Districts served?

Applicants have the option to pick a single congressional district for their state or all the congressional districts in their state. Applicants are required to both select from the drop-down menu and upload a document.

We recommend that applicants select “State-specific district” or “State-ALL Districts,” whichever option is correct for their MIECHV Program, from the drop-down menu. Applicants can use the U.S. Census website to find the relevant congressional districts if they do not already know. For the document to be uploaded, we recommend applicants create a list or map of affected districts in a Word document, convert to PDF, and attach.

How do I submit my program expectations and requirements this year?

In last year’s Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) Update application, we asked awardees to respond to each assurance in their project narrative. The FY24 MIECHV NOFO is the first full NOFO since FY21, therefore we are looking for detailed descriptive information in the project narrative about how awardees are meeting each of their program expectations and requirements. Awardees will not see an Assurances Checklist in this year’s NOFO guidance, however, we will continue to use an Assurances Checklist during NCC Update years.

How should I report my Maintenance of Effort amount in the FY24 NOFO?

Maintenance of Effort is addressed in two ways in the FY24 NOFO: first, applicants are asked to report their FY24 MOE amount to receive MIECHV funding, meaning, the total amount of state general funds obligated for evidence-based home visiting and home visiting initiatives by the recipient entity administering the MIECHV award. Second, applicants are asked to assure that their FY24 MOE amount meets or exceeds their MOE amount from FY19 or FY21 (which were published in a Federal Register Notice on June 23, 2023), whichever is the lesser of the two. Applicants can provide the MOE amount and their assurance directly in their project narrative.

What if I do not have MOE?

If an awardee does not anticipate reporting any MOE amount, and did not report any MOE in FY19 or FY21, they can simply report zero as their MOE amount for FY24, and provide their assurance that their MOE amount meets or exceeds the lesser of FY19 or FY21. Awardees can confirm their MOE amount for FY19 or FY21 in this Federal Register Notice published on June 23, 2023.

If an awardee’s FY24 MOE amount does not meet the requirement of meeting or exceeding the lesser of their MOE amount from FY19 or FY21, they must provide an explanation for circumstances leading to non-compliance, as well as any actions they have taken or plan to take to comply with the MOE requirement.

Can I apply for matching funds if my MOE is $0?

See the Maintenance of Effort section on the MIECHV Reauthorization webpage for more information.

If I elect to implement a model enhancement, what do I need to submit in my application?

If awardees plan to use a new or continuing model enhancement, implemented in alignment with a MIECHV-funded home visiting model, provide in their project narrative a summary of the enhancement(s) to be implemented, including which Local Implementing Agencies (LIAs) will use the enhancement(s) and any training that has been or will be completed. Awardees must provide documentation of model developer concurrence as Attachment 7 with their application. Otherwise, awardees should clearly state that they are not implementing a model enhancement.

If awardees plan to use a new or continuing model enhancement with a MIECHV funded home visiting model, describe the enhancement(s), including the information in this section. Otherwise, clearly state if there is no plan to use an enhancement. For more information about model enhancements, see Appendix A.

The proposed enhancement activities to be funded with the FY24 award and how the activities align with the scope of MIECHV.
The home visiting model that the enhancement(s) will support.
Which LIAs will use the enhancement(s) and how the enhancement(s) could change the LIA’s proposed caseload or eligibility of families.
Training that will be provided.
A letter of concurrence from the model developer for new and continuing model enhancements, as Attachment 7, showing that using the enhancement does not alter core components of the model.

If I am planning to conduct virtual home visits, do I need to submit model developer concurrence as Attachment 7? What do I need to include in my application regarding virtual home visits?

If an awardee plans to conduct virtual home visits, they do not have to provide documentation of model developer concurrence as Attachment 7. Review pages 16-17 of the FY24 NOFO for information regarding virtual home visiting that awardees need to address in their applications.

Which attachments are required?

Attachments 1 through 6, and 12 are required for all applications. All other attachments are required if applicable. Please read the NOFO carefully to assess which additional attachments are required in the submission.

Attachment 1: Work Plan Timeline
Attachment 2: MIECHV Communities, Local Implementing Agencies, and Caseload of Family Slots
Attachment 3: Applicant Staffing Plan
Attachment 4: Current Organizational Chart
Attachment 5: Administrative Cost Detail
Attachment 6: Written Agreements
Attachment 7: (Only if applicable) Model Developer Documentation for Enhancements
Attachment 8: (Only if applicable) Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, And Voluntary Exclusion – Explanation of Inability to Certify
Attachment 9: (Only if applicable) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement or Cost Allocation Plan*
Attachment 10: (Only if applicable) Proof of Nonprofit Status*
Attachment 11: (Required only for new applicants) Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Plan*
Attachment 12: SF-424A Budget Information Non-Construction Programs*
Attachments 13-15: Other Relevant Documents

* Does not count towards page limit

Will the Technical Assistance (TA) Resource Tables be made available again this year?: Yes. The FY24 NOFO TA Resource Tables are available this year and were sent through HRSA’s Electronic Handbooks (EHBs) on or around February 29, 2024.
Do I have to use the templates included in the TA Resource Tables?: No. The FY24 NOFO TA Resource Tables are for optional use. Awardees can use templates of their own, if they wish, as long as they include the required information outlined in the FY24 NOFO.

Budget

How should I budget for the All Grantee Meeting?

As indicated on page 27 of the NOFO, awardees must budget for required MIECHV meetings, including the All Grantee Meeting (AGM). They should budget for at least 1 in-person meeting for up to 5 people for 5 days). If an awardee wants to bring more than five people, please consult with their HRSA Project Officer. Further, if travel cannot be completed during the period of performance because of circumstances beyond their control, funds budgeted for travel may be re-budgeted. Awardees must ensure that AGM attendance, has been budgeted.

How should I report the level of effort for home visitor personnel (e.g., full-time equivalent)?

In the Contractual section of the Budget Narrative, for each contract currently planned, awardees should include the level of effort for home visitor contract personnel and can use either of the following examples:

Example 1: HV 1: 100%; HV 2: 75%; HV 3: 50%; or HV 4: 50%
Example 2: 1 home visitor at 100% FTE; 1 home visitor at 75% FTE; 2 home visitors at 50% FTE

For home visitor personnel working directly for awardee organizations, awardees should include the staff information including FTE in the Personnel Costs section of the Budget Narrative. Awardees should indicate the percentage of full-time equivalent funded under the award. Please see pgs. 26-27 of the NOFO for additional guidance.

Please note that HRSA reserves the right to request a more detailed, line-item breakdown for each contract.

What personnel should be included in the staffing plan (Attachment 3)? Can the staffing plan be referenced for the “Personnel” section of the Budget Narrative?

The staffing plan, Attachment 3, should reflect only an awardee’s recipient-level staff and not their LIA or local level staff. The Applicant Staffing Plan should be aligned with the Personnel section of their Budget Narrative, their organizational chart, and their evaluation plan (if applicable). However, applicants still need to complete the full Budget Narrative staffing details and cannot simply refer to the Staffing Plan in lieu of completing the Budget Narrative Personnel section.

What should I include in my staffing plan (Attachment 3) if I do not have LIAs? Can contractors provide key functional areas under MIECHV Program funding?

For state MIECHV Programs that do not have LIAs, the staffing plan should reflect their recipient-level staff supporting MIECHV key functional areas. Please include contracted staff if they are supporting a key functional area.

How should I report service delivery expenditures in my application? Why did HRSA make this change?

Historically, we have required awardees to indicate which costs out of their total award were considered recipient-level infrastructure expenditures and provide an estimated percentage of the amount of their total award that would be used to support such activities, which was not to exceed 25%.

To reduce burden, we no longer require awardees to report on recipient-level infrastructure expenditures. Instead, they must continue to budget for at least 75% of their federal award on service delivery expenditures to provide or support targeted, intensive home visiting services to families in the MIECHV communities they serve. Examples of service delivery expenditures can include personnel, contracts, supplies, travel, equipment, rental, printing, and other costs. Additional examples can be found in the Glossary of Selected Terms (Appendix B) of the FY24 NOFO.

As service delivery expenditures were previously required to be at least 75% of the award as part of the 25% limitation on recipient-level infrastructure, HRSA has simplified the requirement to reduce burden. Previously, awardees were required to budget for and plan to monitor and account for all recipient-level infrastructure costs. The FY24 NOFO now requires awardees only to ensure the proposed budget reflects plans for at least 75% of funding going toward service delivery activities.

Does the 75% service delivery requirement apply to both the non-federal and federal match funds?

This is an important distinction. For federal matching funds, if an awardee is applying for them, all of the same MIECHV Program requirements apply to those funds as the base funds.

For the non-federal matching funds, the following statutory requirements apply and are outlined in the definition of non-federal funds for matching funds:

Implementation of service models meeting HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness (or up to 25% used for implementing and evaluating promising approaches)
Providing targeted, intensive home visiting services to eligible families
Prioritizing services to high-risk populations

In the past, contracts with subrecipients for TA/supports for LIAs were excluded from the 25% infrastructure ceiling. Does this mean that they are included in the 75% service delivery definition?

Yes, costs that were previously defined as service delivery (as opposed to recipient-level infrastructure) would remain as service delivery.

In Attachment 5, contractual costs for data analysis are considered infrastructure costs. Should this be removed from the contractual line item in the administrative cost breakdown?

Yes, to calculate the anticipated administrative costs, awardees only need to include costs that meet the definition of administrative costs. Awardees should not include costs for infrastructure or service delivery activities.

How do I reflect activities supported by American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) funds in my FY24 MIECHV NOFO application?

The FY24 NOFO submission should not include ARP-funded activities. The FY24 NOFO submission should reflect activities supported by both the MIECHV Base and Matching funds, should an awardee choose to apply for federal matching funds.

The budget narrative on the NOFO is more detailed than in previous applications. For the contractual lines, it seems to be asking for the budget for LIAs. Is this the case? What level of detail needs to be included in the budget narrative?

No, the Budget Narrative Sample examples and optional template are not required forms but additional technical assistance resources. The required level of detail is what is outlined in the NOFO instructions (section IV.2(iv), item D), which is very similar to previous years with the exception of the inclusion of the planned evidence-based model(s) to applicable contracts.

Please note that use of HRSA’s Budget Narrative Sample template is entirely optional and provides general examples and formats for a range of details.

Other

What are my options for conducting evaluation, either through a Coordinated State Evaluation (CSE) or a promising approach (PA) evaluation?

In FY24, any MIECHV eligible entity can propose evaluation through a CSE even if they did not previously participate in CSE. Starting with the FY24 Base Grant Award, CSE is now a 4-year project in one of the following priority areas:

Family Engagement in Home Visiting Services
Maternal Health
Workforce Development

Awardees must clearly state if they do not propose to conduct any of these evaluations with the FY24 Base Grant Award, including if they will discontinue a previously approved CSE. All awardee-led evaluation applicants will also need to provide assurances around staffing and Evaluation Standards in their application.

There are different application requirements for proposing a promising approach vs. a CSE awardee-led evaluation; awardees must review the application requirements carefully. Please see pgs. 18-19 and Appendix A of the NOFO for additional guidance.

How can I propose caseloads for year one and year two, when I might be getting a significant amount of matching funds? Can I take some time to identify the community and model?

Awardees should propose their caseloads for year one and year two in a similar manner as in the Budget Narrative. Use the best estimate assuming stable base funding and anticipated matching funds for FY24 and FY25. Awardees may request revisions to their maximum service capacity, should there be changes in future funding.

Awardees can spend time during the FY24 project period to identify the community(ies) and model(s) to implement. The FY24 NOFO guidance provides flexibility for awardees to work with MIECHV communities to determine readiness, develop capacity, select an evidence-based model(s), in alignment with model fidelity. These pre-implementation activities can be considered part of the awardees’ non-service delivery expenses. Community readiness work is also in alignment with the MIECHV Program’s focus on early childhood systems building and development. In the Project Narrative Section B. Need, awardees will describe their activities for implementing evidence-based home visiting in new communities. Awardees can detail how they intend to establish, expand, and scale services in the state to meet the needs of communities identified in the statewide needs assessment, including the timeframe for anticipated ramp-up of service delivery, and when they expect to reach maximum service capacity for each local implementing agency.

How and when do I submit my FY24 CQI Plan Update?

If an awardee is a first-time, new applicant to the MIECHV Program, they should submit their CQI plan as Attachment 11. For more information, guidance for completing and submitting the CQI plan is available on the MIECHV Data & CQI website. CQI Plans are due every other year for current MIECHV awardees, and the next CQI Plan and Update will be due around the same time as the FY25 NCC Update submission.

Is there a statutory requirement to update MIECHV needs assessments?

MIECHV Reauthorization from 2022 does not have a statutory requirement to update the MIECHV needs assessment. The most recent needs assessment update was outlined in the 2018 reauthorization of the MIECHV Program. Awardees were provided an opportunity to add at-risk communities to their needs assessments prior to the FY24 NOFO application. A similar opportunity will be provided to MIECHV awardees in advance of the FY25 NCC Update, in which awardees can add, not remove, at-risk communities. Guidance for the FY25 needs assessment update amendment opportunity will be shared in 2024.

How did HRSA arrive at the 60% threshold for in-person visits? What is the evidence base for supporting in-person visits versus virtual visits?

MIECHV is committed to in-person visits in alignment with the evidence base for home visiting services. Statute allows home visiting programs to use virtual visits when they are in the best interest of the family and appropriate within the evidence-based model but maintains a commitment to in-person visits. Virtual visits should be used to extend appropriate flexibilities under limited circumstances, such as a declared public health emergency, geographic limitations, or client preference. Virtual visits are treated as a model enhancement, unless a model using virtual visits has met HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness through the HomVEE review.

The 60% threshold was arrived at after reviewing FY23 awardee performance data where over 80% of awardees were already meeting this threshold. HRSA anticipates that this threshold will increase up to 85% in the next few years.

1Bureau, U. S. C. (n.d.). Explore census data. Retrieved April 6, 2023, from https://data.census.gov/table?t=Age+and+Sex&g=0100000US$0400000&y=2021&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0101
2Bureau, U. S. C. (n.d.). Explore census data. Retrieved April 6, 2023, from https://data.census.gov/table?q=United+States+decennial&t=Age+and+Sex&g=0100000US,$0400000&y=2020&tid=DECENNIALDPMP2020.DP1

Date Last Reviewed:

April 2024

Parents: don’t struggle alone