Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit, Colorado Plateau CESU | G19AS00059

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the funding opportunity number for this grant?

The funding opportunity is identified as G19AS00059.

Which agency is offering this opportunity?

This opportunity is offered by the Department of the Interior (DOI), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), specifically through the Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center (NOROCK).

Is this opportunity connected to a specific network or program?

Yes. It is issued under the Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU) network for the Colorado Plateau.

What type of award is anticipated?

The award is expected to be made as a cooperative agreement. This indicates the project is intended to involve collaboration with the agency rather than functioning as a hands-off grant.

Is this a discretionary award?

Yes. The opportunity is described as a discretionary award.

What is the CFDA number and program area?

The activity falls under CFDA 15.808 and is categorized as science and technology and other research and development.

How much funding is available?

The total amount available is modest, with an award ceiling of $15,200.

How many awards does the agency expect to make?

The agency anticipates making one award.

What is the main purpose of the project?

The purpose is to use and analyze existing elk blood test data to evaluate whether recent management changes at certain supplemental winter feedgrounds are reducing elk-to-elk transmission of brucellosis over time.

What is the primary outcome measure the project will evaluate?

The key measurable outcome is site-specific seroprevalence, meaning the proportion of elk testing positive for antibodies indicating exposure to Brucella at a particular feedground or location.

Does the project require collecting new field samples?

No. The emphasis is on compiling and analyzing existing historical blood test dataset(s), rather than collecting new field samples.

What kind of data will be used?

The project is based on existing elk blood test data, including historical datasets that can be compiled to evaluate trends in seroprevalence at specific feedgrounds over time.

Why is brucellosis a concern at supplemental winter feedgrounds?

The opportunity notes that brucellosis prevalence on supplemental feedgrounds has been correlated with how long feeding continues during the season. Longer feeding seasons can keep elk concentrated for extended periods, increasing opportunities for disease spread.

How is brucellosis primarily transmitted among elk, according to the notice?

The notice indicates elk are primarily exposed through contact with aborted fetuses or associated tissues and fluids.

What factors may influence exposure risk at feedgrounds?

The opportunity suggests that anything increasing close contact rates or crowding around feeding areas can elevate risk, and that contact rates with infectious materials are tied to elk density and the style of feeding (including how feed is distributed and how that affects aggregation and movement patterns).

What management changes are being evaluated?

Managers have been experimenting with changes to feeding regimes at a subset of feedgrounds, including adjustments to feed distribution methods and changes to the duration of the feeding season. These manipulations are intended to reduce crowding and shorten the period of intense congregation.

Why is this analysis needed now?

The notice states that, despite several years of on-the-ground management changes, no one has yet conducted a formal assessment to determine whether these efforts are translating into reduced seroprevalence. This project is intended to fill that gap.

What kinds of analysis does the opportunity imply will be needed?

While specific methods are not prescribed in the excerpt, the opportunity emphasizes careful statistical analysis of historical datasets to detect trends and differences associated with management interventions, with an end goal of evaluating whether changes in feeding practices correspond with measurable declines in site-specific seroprevalence over time.

What deliverables are expected at the end of the project?

The deliverables are academic-quality research products: a thesis and a completed manuscript suitable for publication.

What does "manuscript suitable for publication" imply about expectations?

It implies the work should be rigorous enough to stand up to peer review and be useful for informing future management decisions.

When was the opportunity originally posted and when did it close?

The original posting date was May 7, 2019, and the original closing date was May 21, 2019.

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligibility is broadly listed as "Others" and is further clarified in the opportunity's additional eligibility text, which is referenced but not included in the provided excerpt.

What is the geographic or organizational context referenced by the opportunity?

The opportunity is issued under the CESU network for the Colorado Plateau and is administered through USGS NOROCK. The project context involves supplemental winter feedgrounds where elk are managed and monitored.

Is the project focused on a single site or multiple sites?

The outcome is described as site-specific seroprevalence, and the project is framed around evaluating changes at a subset of feedgrounds, which implies a multi-site comparison may be part of the analysis.

What is the overall scope of the project given the budget and award count?

It is a small, single-award research effort with an award ceiling of $15,200, focused on analysis of existing surveillance data and production of publishable scientific outputs.