Sample Solutions Library

8 process-guide scenarios — one per PWS deliverable

The eight process guides USDA needs by the end of the period of performance — each paired with the HSG senior lead, specific approach, deliverables, and expected outcome. Click any scenario to see the full approach.

Filter:

Showing 8 of 8 scenarios

01CommunicationsProcess Guide

Communications Strategy Guide

Food for Peace operates across foreign markets where U.S. visibility carries operational, diplomatic, and safety risk; across a U.S. domestic audience that needs to understand how the program connects to American farmers and ranchers under an America First framing; and across beneficiary communities who need to recognize the U.S. role consistently with host-country safety constraints. USDA inherits this triangulation problem without an established playbook.

Read solution PDF
02Prepositioned CommoditiesProcess Guide

Prepositioned Commodities Guide

Prepositioned commodity strategy is a trade-off space — the cost of establishing and maintaining preposition stockpiles, the risk of holding shelf-stable commodities in volatile regions, the benefit of in-region response capacity when an unforeseen emergency strikes, and the supply-chain constraints around Cargo Preference compliance and U.S. domestic specialty-formulated commodity manufacturing capacity. USDA needs a single decision framework for that trade-off space.

Read solution PDF
03Geography & PrioritizationProcess Guide

Country Selection Guide

The FY25 Food for Peace Notice of Funding Opportunity (USDA FAS, published May 13, 2026) selected seven priority countries — Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Kenya, and Rwanda — as the empirical baseline for the program's first USDA-administered award cycle. USDA does not need a methodology to pick countries de novo; USDA has picked them. USDA needs the analytical infrastructure to (a) defend the seven selections under Congressional and OIG scrutiny against the NOFO's three statutory eligibility triggers, (b) operationalize the four-stage graduation pathway that NOFO Reform 3 commits the program to, and (c) provide a defensible ongoing-vet methodology for adjusting the country list at future NOFO cycles.

Read solution PDF
04Cross-CuttingStakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder Relations Guide

FFP's stakeholder community spans the Food Aid Consultative Group (FACG, congressionally-mandated), the International Food Relief Partnership (IFRP), U.S. agricultural producer associations, Title II implementing PVOs, the World Food Programme (WFP), and host-country governments. USDA needs an engagement architecture rather than ad hoc outreach.

Read solution PDF
05Non-Traditional EnvironmentsRisk Management

Risk Management Guide

FFP operates in emergency, unstable, and otherwise non-traditional environments that USDA has not historically administered. Risk assessment, third-party monitoring, program evaluation, and implementing-partner personnel safety all require methodologies adapted to environments where standard pre-engagement diligence is unavailable.

Read solution PDF
06Cross-CuttingProcess Guide

Programmatic Reporting Guide

FFP carries a portfolio of statutory and non-statutory reporting obligations including the Food Aid Quality Review (FAQR), congressional reporting touchpoints, and partner-facing reporting. USDA needs a reporting architecture that USDA can run.

Read solution PDF
07Cross-CuttingProcess Guide

Non-Emergency Programming Planning Guide

FFP non-emergency programming — including Title V Farmer-to-Farmer — operates on different planning cycles, partner ecosystems, and evaluation logic than emergency Title II. USDA needs an integrated planning framework that treats emergency and non-emergency programming as one operating envelope.

Read solution PDF
08Cross-CuttingProcess Guide

Programmatic Infrastructure Guide

FFP's IT infrastructure and system needs do not transfer one-to-one from USAID. USDA needs a framework to define programmatic infrastructure needs and a methodology to specify, procure, and stand up the systems that support FFP execution under USDA management.

Read solution PDF