MENU TITLE: "Breaking the Cycle" Evaluation
.
Series: NIJ Solicitation

Published: September 1996

24 pages

42,925 bytes



-------------------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice



Jeremy Travis, Director



National Institute of Justice

Solicitation



September 1996

-------------------------------------



"Breaking the Cycle" Evaluation





I.   Introduction



The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has entered

into a Cooperative Agreement with the University of

Alabama at Birmingham TASC Program (TASC) 

to implement the Breaking the Cycle (BTC)

Demonstration Project. It is anticipated that

Birmingham is the first of what will eventually be

several BTC demonstration sites. The evaluator

chosen by NIJ will be expected to work closely with

the demonstration sites, the NIJ staff, and the BTC

program board to complete the evaluation. Up to

$600,000 will be available for the evaluation of

the Birmingham site.



=======================

Applicants should review the Areas of Research

Required section (pp. 2-3), the Due Date subsection

and Letter of Intent box (p. 3) and the Award

Amount and Contact subsections (p. 4) for special

conditions that apply to this solicitation. 

=======================



II.  Background



A consortium of federal agencies, led by the Office

of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and NIJ,

with support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance

(BJA), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA),

and the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment

(CSAT), has developed the BTC demonstration to test

the effectiveness and impact of a comprehensive,

fully-integrated, systemwide criminal justice

intervention for drug-involved offenders. The BTC

program entails universal drug testing and needs

assessment of all offenders entering the criminal

justice system, followed by appropriate assignment

to a combination of treatment, sanctions, and

supervision options regardless of the status of the

defendant (in custody, on release) or the status of

the case (pretrial, post conviction).



BTC embraces the concept that systemic changes in

the criminal justice system, in the form of integrated 

drug needs assessment, testing, sanctions, and 

treatment, can result in reduced drug use and reduced 

consequences of drug use. At its core, the philosophy 

behind BTC is simple: perform a drug use needs 

assessment, including testing, for every person 

entering the criminal justice system and, based on 

the results, apply the appropriate blend of treatment, 

sanctions and supervision throughout the period in 

which the defendant is under criminal justice system

supervision. In many fundamental ways, however, 

BTC will differ from other testing and treatment

programs. First, the testing and needs assessment

component will be universal, unlike other programs

into which participants are screened. Second, BTC

will provide drug users with integrated access to a

wide(r) range of services and resources, ranging

from in- and out-custody treatment, to employment

counseling, training, and life enhancement skills.

Such programs will be available throughout the

period in which the person is under criminal

justice system supervision with the goal of

eliminating an individual's drug use, and with

progress toward that goal moderated and regulated

by sanctions, treatment and supervision.



Both the evaluation and demonstration will be

managed by NIJ. A Director of Science and Research

will be responsible for structuring BTC to test the

primary hypothesis that a systemic policy of drug

needs assessment combined with sanctions and

services will result in measurable changes at the

site level. A Director of Operations will be

responsible for ensuring complete program

implementation in each demonstration site, and for

securing, coordinating and monitoring technical

assistance. A Program Board, including the Director

of NIJ, the Director of Science and Research,

Director of Operations, technical assistance

representatives, and other specialists will provide

strategic insights on program components,

hypothesis testing, operational issues, and

information management in the context of the

anticipated expansion to additional sites. 



III. Areas of Research Required



The purpose of the BTC evaluation is to test the

hypothesis that an integrated policy of systemwide

drug testing, needs assessment, treatment and

supervision, appropriately tailored to each

defendant's needs, will result in significant

societal benefits. BTC offers significant

opportunity to expand our understanding of the

impact and efficacy of universal mandatory

treatment, as well as the consequences of creating

forward and backward treatment and supervision

linkages within the criminal justice system. The

evaluation should pay particular attention to

explicating the impact that such a policy of

universal assessment and assignment has on:



o drug use in the subject population;



o criminal activity in the subject population;



o social indicators such as health and employment

in the subject population;



o system costs relative to benefits;



o allocation and utilization of system resources,

such as detention and treatment capacity.



These system effects may be in part measured by

such factors as:



o the extent to which universal testing, needs

assessment, assignment and supervision are

achieved;



o number of changes in status, or moves from one

program phase to another (ex: treatment to

sanctions);



o changes in test failure rates and proportion of

incoming population that is drug-free;



o changes in length of stay under correctional

supervision;



o changes in recidivism and rearrest;



o impact on case processing, including time to

disposition and necessary procedural changes.



Process components that will need to be accounted

for include:



o Court Procedures: monitoring and supervision

procedures and responsibilities; impact of judicial

style and judicial calendar; 



o Drug Testing Procedures: frequency of testing (by

program phase); impact of different testing

procedures (random; scheduled; acceptance

sampling); procedures for reporting test outcomes

to courts;



o Use of Sanctions/Incentives: assignment of

individuals to sanction/treatment modalities;

decision rules for use of sanctions; 



o Treatment Services: types of services provided

(in-custody; community, etc); relationship between

treatment providers and courts;



o Other Services: education services; employment

services; housing assistance; medical care;



o Exchange of Information: Format of data exchange;

types of information exchanged; restrictions and

allowable uses of data.



Prospective applicants are reminded that this is a

hypothesis-testing evaluation. Taking into

consideration the time lines and schedules, the

need for collaboration with the demonstration site,

and resource constraints, applicants are encouraged

to propose rigorous, multi-method designs that may

include experimental and randomized design

components. Applicants should also specify the type

of research and evaluation presence they anticipate

they will maintain at the Birmingham site. NIJ

anticipates that additional sites may be added to

the evaluation. Accordingly, applicants should

briefly discuss factors, including fixed and

variable costs and institutional capabilities, that

would need to be addressed as part of a multi-site

evaluation. This discussion should be submitted on

a separate page and will not be counted against the

page limit. 



IV.  How to Apply 



This section presents information about how to

apply, recommendations to proposal writers, and

requirements for grant recipients. Proposals not

conforming to these application procedures will not

be considered. 



===========================

Letter of Intent



NIJ is trying to streamline its process to

accommodate the volume of proposals anticipated

under this and other solicitations. Researchers can

help in a significant way by sending NIJ a non-

binding letter of intent by October 15, 1996. The

Institute will use these letters to forecast the

numbers of peer panels it needs and to identify

conflicts of interest among potential reviewers.

Please fill out the mailer on the last page of this

solicitation or send email to rileyj@ojp.usdoj.gov.

===========================



The application form and related forms are appended

at the end of this solicitation. These forms are as

follows:



o Standard Form (SF) 424 (Application for Federal

Assistance) and instructions 



o Budget Detail Worksheet (OJP form 7150/1)



o Instructions (for the Program Narrative)



o "Assurances" (OJP Form 4000/3)



o "Certifications...." (OJP Form 4061/6)



Due date. Completed proposals must be received at

the National Institute of Justice by the close of

business on November 7, 1996 5:00 pm EST.

Postmarked applications arriving after the due date

will not be eligible. Extensions of this deadline

will not be permitted.



Number of copies. Send ten (10) copies of the fully

executed proposal.



Where to send. Proposals should be sent to:



"Breaking the Cycle" Evaluation

National Institute of Justice

Room 868

633 Indiana Avenue N.W.

Washington, DC 20531



Award period. In general, NIJ limits its grants and

cooperative agreements to a maximum period of 12 or

24 months. However, longer budget periods may be

considered.



Number of awards. NIJ anticipates supporting 1

grant under this solicitation.



Award amount. An award totaling $600,000 will be

made available for this NIJ solicitation. Applications 

should be structured on the premise that up to 

$300,000 will be made available for the Birmingham 

evaluation in federal Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 and up 

to $300,000 in FY 1998.



Contact. Prospective applicants should refrain from

contacting the Birmingham site without first

contacting NIJ. Questions regarding site operations

and implementation should be directed to Carolyn

Peake at 202-616-3234. Questions regarding

application design and hypothesis testing issues

should be directed to Jack Riley at 202-616-9030.

Organizations and individuals intending to apply

should submit a letter of intent to Jack Riley by

October 15, 1996. Applicants intending to submit

will receive a supplemental package of

information which describes the proposed scope of

operations at Birmingham. 



Certifications. Applicants should read and sign the

certification form regarding lobbying; debarment,

suspension, and other responsibility matters; and

drug-free workplace requirement included in this

solicitation. Signing this form commits the

applicant to compliance with the certification

requirements under 28 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations) 69, "New Restrictions on Lobbying,"

and 28 CFR 67, "Government-Wide Debarment and

Suspension (Nonprocurement) and Government-Wide

Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)." The

certification will be treated as a material representation 

of the fact upon which reliance will be placed by the 

U.S. Department of Justice in making awards.



Recommendations to Proposal Writers



Over the past 4 years, NIJ staff have reviewed

approximately 1,500 grant applications. On the basis 

of those reviews and inquiries from applicants,  NIJ 

offers the following recommendations to help 

potential applicants present workable, understandable 

proposals, especially for applicants new to NIJ. Many 

of these recommendations were adopted from materials

provided to NIJ by the State Justice Institute. Others 

reflect standard NIJ requirements.



The author(s) of the proposal should be clearly

identified.



Proposals that are incorrectly collated, incomplete, 

or handwritten will be judged as submitted or, at 

NIJ's discretion, will be returned without a deadline 

extension. No additions to the original submission 

are allowed. NIJ suggests that applicants make 

certain that they address the questions, issues, and 

requirements set forth below when preparing an 

application.



1. What is the subject or problem you wish to

address? Describe the subject or problem and how it

affects the criminal justice system and the public.

Discuss how your approach will improve the

situation or advance the state-of-the-art or state-

of-the-science knowledge and explain why it is the

most appropriate approach to take. Give appropriate

citations to the research literature. The source of

statistics or research findings cited to support a

statement or position should be included in a

reference list.



2. What do you want to do? Explain the goal(s) of

the project in simple, straightforward terms. The

goal(s) should describe the intended consequences

or expected overall effect of the proposed project,

rather than the tasks or activities to be conducted. 

To the greatest extent possible, applicants should 

avoid a specialized vocabulary that is not readily 

understood by the general public. Technical jargon 

does not enhance an application.



3. How will you do it? Describe the methodology

carefully so that what you propose to do and how

you would do it is clear. All proposed tasks should

be set forth so that a reviewer can see a logical

progression of tasks and relate those tasks directly 

to the accomplishment of the project's goal(s). When 

in doubt about whether to provide a more detailed 

explanation or to assume a particular level of 

knowledge or expertise on the part of the reviewers, 

err on the side of caution and provide the additional 

information. A description of project tasks also will 

help identify necessary budget items. All staff 

positions and project costs should relate directly to 

the tasks described. NIJ encourages applicants to 

attach letters of cooperation and support from 

agencies that will be involved in or directly 

affected by the proposed project.



4. What should you include in a grant application

for a program evaluation? If a grant application is

for a program evaluation, describe how the

evaluation will determine whether the proposed

program, training, procedure, service, or

technology accomplished the objectives it was

designed to meet. Applicants seeking support for a

proposed evaluation should describe the criteria

that will be used to evaluate the project's

effectiveness and identify program elements that

will require further modification. The description

in the application should include how the

evaluation will be conducted, when it will occur

during the project period, who will conduct it, and

what specific measures will be used. In most

instances, the evaluation should be conducted by

persons not connected with the implementation of

the procedure, training, service, or technique, or

the administration of the project.



5. How will others learn about your findings?

Include a plan to disseminate the results of the

research, evaluation, technology, or demonstration

beyond the jurisdictions and individuals directly

affected by the project. The plan should identify

the specific methods that will be used to inform

the field about the project, such as the publication 

of journal articles or the distribution of key materials. 

Expectations regarding products are discussed more 

fully in the following section, "Requirements for 

Award Recipients." A statement that a report or 

research findings "will be made available to" the 

field is not sufficient. 



The specific means of distribution or dissemination

as well as the types of recipients should be identified. 

Reproduction and dissemination costs are allowable 

budget items. Applicants must concisely describe 

the interim and final products and address each 

product's purpose, audience, and usefulness to the 

field. This discussion should identify the principal 

criminal justice constituency or type of agency for 

which each product is intended and describe how 

the constituent group or agency would be expected 

to use the product or report. Successful proposals 

will clearly identify the nature of the grant products 

that can reasonably be expected if the project is 

funded. In addition, a schedule of delivery dates of 

all products should be delineated.



6. What are the specific costs involved? The budget

application should be presented clearly. Major

budget categories such as personnel, benefits,

travel, supplies, equipment, and indirect costs

should be identified separately. The components of

"Other" or "Miscellaneous" items should be

specified in the application budget narrative and

should not include set-asides for undefined

contingencies.



7. How much detail should be included in the budget

narrative? The budget narrative should list all

planned expenditures and detail the salaries,

materials, and cost assumptions used to estimate

project costs. The narrative and cost estimates

should be presented under the following standard

budget categories: personnel, fringe benefits,

travel, equipment, supplies, contracts, other, and

indirect costs. For multiyear projects, applicants

must include the full amount of NIJ funding for the

entire life of the project. This amount should be

reflected in item 15g on Form 424 and in TOTAL

PROJECT COSTS in the Budget Detail Worksheet (OJP

Form 7150/1). When appropriate, grant applications

should include justification of consultants and a

full explanation of daily rates for any consultants

proposed. To avoid common shortcomings of

application budget narratives, include the

following information:



o Personnel estimates that accurately provide the

amount of time to be spent by personnel involved

with the project and the total associated costs,

including current salaries for the designated

personnel (e.g., Project Director, 50 percent of 1

year's annual salary of $50,000 = $25,000). If

salary costs are computed using an hourly or daily

rate, the annual salary and number of hours or days

in a work year should be shown.



o Estimates for supplies and expenses supported by

a complete description of the supplies to be used,

nature and extent of printing to be done, anticipated 

telephone charges, and other common expenditures, 

with the basis for computing the estimates included 

(e.g., 100 reports x 75 pages each x $0.05/page = $375). 

Supply and expense estimates offered simply as 

"based on experience" are not sufficient.



8. What travel regulations apply to the budget

estimates? Transportation costs and per diem rates 

must comply with the policies of the applicant 

organization, and a copy of the applicant's travel 

policy should be submitted as an appendix to the 

application. If the applicant does not have a 

travel policy established in writing, then travel 

rates must be consistent with those established by 

the Federal Government. The budget narrative should 

state which regulations are in force for the project 

and should include the estimated fare, the number of 

persons traveling, the number of trips to be taken, 

and the length of stay. The estimated costs of 

travel, lodging, ground transportation, and other

subsistence should be listed separately. When

combined, the subtotals for these categories should

equal the estimate listed on the budget form.



9. Which forms should be used? A copy of (SF) 424,

Application for Federal Assistance, plus instructions, 

appear in the back of this document. Please follow 

the instructions carefully. In addition, complete the 

Budget Detail Worksheet (OJP Form 7150/1), 

Assurances (OJP Form 4000/3), and certifications 

regarding lobbying; debarment, suspension, and 

other responsibility matters; and drug-free workplace 

requirements (OJP Form 4061/6).



10. What technical materials are required to be

included in the application?



o A one-page abstract of the full proposal,

highlighting the project's purpose, methods,

activities and, when known, the location(s) of

field research.



o A program narrative, which is the technical

portion of the proposal. It should include a clear,

concise statement of the problem, goal(s), and

objectives of the project and related questions to

be explored. A discussion of the relationship of

the proposed work to the existing literature is

expected.



o A statement of the project's anticipated

contribution to criminal justice policy and

practice. It is important that applicants briefly

cite those particular issues and concerns of

present-day criminal justice policy that stimulate

the proposed line of inquiry and suggest what their

own investigation would contribute to current

knowledge.



o A detailed statement of the proposed research or

study design and analytical methodologies. The

proposed data sources, data collection strategies,

variables and issues to be examined, and procedures

of analysis to be employed should be delineated

carefully and completely. When appropriate,

experimental designs are encouraged because of

their potential relevance to policymaking and the

strength of the evidence they can produce.



o The organization and management plan to conduct

the study. A list of major milestones of events,

activities, and products and a timetable for

completion that indicates the time commitments to

individual project tasks should be included. All

grant activities, including writing of the final

report, should be completed within the duration of

the award period.



o The applicant's curriculum vitae should summarize

education, research experience, and bibliographic

information related to the proposed work.



11. How may grant funds be used? Grant funds may be

used to purchase or lease equipment essential to

accomplishing the objectives of the project. The

budget narrative must list such equipment and

explain why the equipment is necessary. Funds may

not be used for operating programs, writing texts

or handbooks, training, etc.



12. To what extent may indirect costs be included

in the budget estimates? It is the policy of the

Institute that all costs should be budgeted

directly; however, if an applicant has an indirect

cost rate that has been approved by a Federal

agency within the past 2 years, an indirect cost-

recovery estimate may be included in the budget. A

copy of the approved rate agreement should be

submitted as an appendix to the application. If an

applicant does not have an approved rate agreement,

the applicant should contact the Office of the

Comptroller, Office of Justice Programs, at

202-307-0623, to obtain information about preparing

an indirect cost-rate proposal.



13. What, if any, matching funds are required?

Units of State and local governments (not including

publicly supported institutions of higher

education) are encouraged to contribute a match

(cash, noncash, or both) of requested funds. Other

applicants also are encouraged to seek matching

contributions from other Federal agencies or

private foundations to assist in meeting the costs

of the project.



14. Should other funding sources be listed?

Applicants are expected to identify all other

Federal, local, or private sources of support,

including other NIJ programs, to which this or a

closely related proposal has been or will be

submitted. This information permits NIJ to consider

the joint funding potential and limits the

possibility of inadvertent duplicate funding.

Applicants may submit more than one proposal to

NIJ, but the same proposal cannot be submitted in

more than one program area.



15. What is the deadline? November 7, 1996 5:00 pm

EST.



16. Is there a page limit? NIJ has established a

limit of 30 double-spaced pages (with font size not

smaller than 12 points) for all normal grant

applications. This page limit does not include

references, budget narrative, curriculum vitae,

forms noted in item 9 above, or necessary

appendixes. Applications for small grants ($1,000-

$50,000) are limited to 15 double-spaced pages.

Proposals failing to conform to these page and font

limitations will not be accepted.



17. What elements constitute the proposal? The

following components, presented in the following 

order, are mandatory. Omission can result in rejection 

of the application.



a. SF-424 (with Assurances attached), followed by

OJP Form 7150/1 (Budget Detail Worksheet), budget

narrative, negotiated rate agreement, and

certifications.



b. Names and affiliations of all key persons from

applicant and subcontractor(s), advisers,

consultants, and Advisory Board members. Include

the name of the Principal Investigator, title,

organizational affiliation (if any), department (if

institution of higher education), address, phone,

and fax.



c. Abstract.



d. Table of contents.



e. Project narrative.



f. References.



g. Resumes of key personnel.



18. What does the review process entail? After all

applications for a competition are received, NIJ

will convene a series of peer review panels of

criminal justice professionals and researchers. NIJ

will assign proposals to peer panels that it deems

most appropriate. Panel members read each proposal

and meet to assess the technical merits and policy

relevance of the proposed research. Panel 

assessments of the proposals, together with

assessments by NIJ staff, are submitted to the

Director, who has sole and final authority over

approval and awards. The review normally takes 60

to 90 days, depending on the number of applications

received. Each applicant receives written comments

from the peer review panel concerning the strengths

and weaknesses of the proposal. These comments may

include suggestions for how a revised or subsequent

application to NIJ might be improved.



19. What are the criteria for an award? The

essential question asked of each applicant is, "If

this study were successful, how would criminal

justice policies or operations be improved?" Four

criteria are applied in the evaluation process:



o Impact of the proposed project.



o Feasibility of the approach to the issue,

including technical merit and practical

considerations.



o Originality of the approach, including creativity

of the proposal and capability of the research staff.



o Economy of the approach. 



Applicants bear the responsibility of demonstrating

to the panel that the proposed study addresses the

critical issues of the topic area and that the study 

findings could ultimately contribute to a practical 

application in law enforcement or criminal justice. 

Reviewers will assess applicants' awareness of 

related research or studies and their ability to 

direct the research or study toward answering 

questions of policy or improving the state of 

criminal justice operations.



Technical merit is judged by the likelihood that

the study design will produce convincing findings.

Reviewers take into account the logic and timing of

the research or study plan, the validity and reliability 

of measures proposed, the appropriateness of 

statistical methods to be used, and each applicant's 

awareness of factors that might dilute the credibility 

of the findings. Impact is judged by the scope of the 

proposed approach and by the utility of the proposed

products. Reviewers consider each applicant's

understanding of the process of innovation in the

targeted criminal justice agency or setting and

knowledge of prior uses of criminal justice research 

by the proposed criminal justice constituency. 

Appropriateness of products in terms of proposed 

content and format is also considered.



Applicants' qualifications are evaluated both in

terms of the depth of experience and the relevance

of that experience to the proposed research or

study. Costs are evaluated in terms of the

reasonableness of each item and the utility of the

project to NIJ's program.



20. Are there any other considerations in selecting

applications for an award? Projects should have a

national impact or have potential relevance to a

number of jurisdictions. Because of the broad

national mandate of the National Institute of

Justice, projects that address the unique concerns

of a single jurisdiction should be fully justified.

Projects that intend to provide services in

addition to performing research are eligible for

support, but only for the resources necessary to

conduct the research tasks outlined in the

proposal.



The applicant's performance on previous or current

NIJ grants will also be taken into consideration in

making funding decisions.



21. Who is eligible to apply? NIJ awards grants to,

or enters into cooperative agreements with,

educational institutions, nonprofit organizations,

public agencies, individuals, and profitmaking

organizations that are willing to waive their fees.

Where appropriate, special eligibility criteria are

indicated in the solicitation.



22. Does NIJ accept resubmission of proposals? NIJ

will accept resubmission of a previously submitted

proposal. The applicant should indicate on Question

8, Form 424, that the application is a revision.

The applicant should include this information in

the abstract. Finally, the applicant should prepare

a one-page response to the earlier panel review (to

follow the abstract) and include (1) the title,

submission date, and NIJ-assigned application

number of the previous proposal, and (2) a brief

summary of responses to the review and/or revisions

to the proposal.



Requirements for Award Recipients



Required products. Each project is expected to

generate tangible products of maximum benefit to

criminal justice professionals, researchers, and

policymakers. In particular, NIJ strongly

encourages documents that provide information of

practical utility to law enforcement officials;

prosecutors; judges; corrections officers; victim

services providers; and Federal, State, county, and

local elected officials.



Products should include:



o A summary of approximately 2,500 words

highlighting the research findings and the policy

issues those findings will inform. The material

should be written in a style that will be accessible 

to policy officials and practitioners and suitable for 

possible publication as an NIJ Research in Brief. An 

NIJ editorial style guide is sent to each project 

director at the time of the award.



o A full technical report, including a discussion

of the research question, review of the literature,

description of project methodology, detailed review

of project findings, and conclusions and policy

recommendations.



o Clean copies of all automated data sets developed

during the research and full documentation prepared

in accordance with the instructions in the NIJ

publication Depositing Data with the Data Resources

Program of the National Institute of Justice: A

Handbook.



o Brief project summaries for NIJ use in preparing

annual reports to the President and Congress.



As appropriate, additional products such as case

studies and interim and final reports (e.g., articles, 

manuals, or training materials) may be specified in 

the proposal or negotiated at the time of the award.



Prohibition on supplanting funds. Federal funds

must be used to supplement existing funds and not

replace those funds which have been appropriated

for the same purpose. Potential supplanting will be

the subject of application review, as well as pre-

award review, post-award monitoring, and audit. If

there is a potential presence of supplanting, the

applicant or grantee will be required to supply

documentation demonstrating that the reduction in

non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other

than the receipt or expected receipt of Federal

funds.



Public Release of Automated Data Sets



NIJ is committed to ensuring the public availability 

of research data and to this end established its Data 

Resources Program in 1984. All NIJ award recipients 

who collect data are required to submit a machine-

readable copy of the data and appropriate 

documentation to NIJ prior to the  conclusion of the 

project. The data and materials are reviewed for 

completeness. NIJ staff then create machine-readable 

data sets, prepare users' guides, and distribute data 

and documentation to other researchers in the field. 

A variety of formats are acceptable; however, the data 

and materials must conform with requirements detailed 

in Depositing Data With the Data Resources Program 

of the National Institute of Justice: A Handbook. 

A copy of this handbook is sent to each project 

director at the time of the award. For further 

information about NIJ's Data Resources Program, 

contact Dr. James Trudeau at 202-307-1355.



Standards of Performance by Recipients



NIJ expects individuals and institutions receiving

its support to work diligently and professionally

toward completing a high-quality research or study

product. Besides this general expectation, NIJ

imposes specific requirements to ensure that proper

financial and administrative controls are applied

to the project. Financial and general reporting

requirements are detailed in Financial Guide,

published in April 1996 by the Office of Justice

Programs. This guideline manual is sent to

recipient institutions with the award documents.

Project directors and recipient financial

administrators should pay particular attention to

the regulations in this document.



Audit requirement. State and local governments,

nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher 

education are governed by OMB Circular A-133, as 

amended. Whether an audit is required under this 

circular is dependent upon the amount of Federal 

funds that can be audited during the recipients 

fiscal year. If the organization receives $300,000 

or more per year in Federal funds, the organization 

shall have an organizationwide financial and 

compliance audit.



Commercial (for-profit) organizations shall have

financial and compliance audits performed by

qualified individuals who are independent from

those who authorize the expenditure of Federal

funds. This audit must be performed in accordance

with Government Auditing Standards. The audit

thresholds contained in OMB Circular A-133, as

amended applies.



Applicants are required to provide the period of

their organization's fiscal year and the name of

their organization's cognizant Federal agency in

block 11 of the SF-424. The cognizant Federal

agency is generally determined based on the

preponderance of Federal dollars received by the

applicant.



Financial status reports. Financial status reports

(SF 269A) are due quarterly on the 45th day

following the end of each calendar quarter. A

report must be submitted every quarter the award is

active. The final report is due 120 days after the

end date of the award. The Office of the Comptroller, 

Office of Justice Programs, will provide a copy of 

this form in the initial award package.



Conditions for suspension or termination of

funding. NIJ may suspend, in whole or in part,

terminate funding for, or impose another sanction

on a recipient for the following reasons:



o Failure to comply substantially with the

requirements or statutory objectives of the Omnibus

Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as

amended; the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988; program

guidelines issued thereunder; or other provisions

of Federal law.



o Failure to make satisfactory progress toward the

goal(s) or strategies set forth in this application.



o Failure to adhere to the requirements in the

agreement, standard conditions, or special

conditions.



o Proposing or implementing substantial plan changes 

to the extent that, if originally submitted,  the 

application would not have been selected for funding.



o Failure to submit reports.



o Filing a false certification in this application

or other report or document.



Before imposing sanctions, NIJ will provide

reasonable notice to the recipient of its intent to

impose sanctions and will attempt informally to

resolve the problem. Hearing and appeal procedures

will follow those in U.S. Department of Justice

regulations in 28 CFR 18.



Program Monitoring



Award recipients and Principal Investigators assume

certain responsibilities as part of their participation in 

government-sponsored research and evaluation. NIJ's 

monitoring activities are intended to help grantees 

meet these responsibilities. They are based on good

communication and open dialogue, with collegiality

and mutual respect. Some of the elements of this

dialogue follow:



o Communication with NIJ in the early stages of the

grant, as the elements of the proposal's design and

methodology are developed and put into operation.



o Timely communication with NIJ regarding any

developments that might affect the project's

compliance with the schedules, milestones, and

products set forth in the proposal. (See statement

on "Timeliness" below.)



o Communication with other NIJ grantees conducting

related research projects. An annual "cluster

conference" should be anticipated and should be

budgeted for by applicants at a cost of $1,000 for

each year of the grant.



o Providing NIJ on request with brief descriptions

of the project in interim stages at such time as

the Institute may need this information to meet its

reporting requirements to Congress. NIJ will give

as much advance notification of these requests as

possible but will expect a timely response from

grantees when requests are made. NIJ is prepared to

receive such communication through electronic

media.



o Providing NIJ with copies of presentations made

at conferences, meetings, and elsewhere based in

whole or in part on the work of the project.



o Providing NIJ with prepublication copies of articles 

based on the project appearing in professional journals 

or the media, either during the life of the grant or after.



o Other reporting requirements (progress reports,

final reports, and other grant products) are spelled 

out elsewhere in this section. Financial reporting 

requirements will be described in the grant award 

documents received by successful applicants.



Progress Reports



NIJ Program Managers should be kept informed of

research progress. Written progress reports are

required on a semiannual basis and should inform the 

Program Manager of which tasks have been completed 

and whether significant delays or departures from the 

original workplan are expected. The first progress 

report should cover the period from the beginning 

date of the project through the end of the first 

complete quarter (quarters are January 1-March 31, 

April 1-June 30, July 1-September 30, and 

October 1-December 31). Subsequent progress reports 

should cover the next two quarters.



All progress reports are due 30 days following the

end of the reporting period. For example, if a

grant is awarded in May, the first progress report

would cover the rest of the current quarter

(through June 30) and the first complete quarter

(July 1-September 30) and would be due October 31;

the second progress report would cover the next two

quarters (October 1-December 31 and January 1-March

31) and would be due April 30.



Timeliness. Grantees are expected to complete award

products within the timeframes that have been

agreed upon by NIJ and the grantee. NIJ recognizes

that there are legitimate reasons for project

extensions. However, NIJ does not consider the

assumption of additional research projects that

impinge upon previous time commitments as

legitimate reasons for delay. Projects with

unreasonable delays can be terminated

administratively. In this situation, any funds

remaining are withdrawn. Future applications from

either the project director or the recipient

institution are subject to strict scrutiny and may

be denied support based on past failure to meet

minimum standards.



Publications. The Institute encourages grantees to

prepare their work for NIJ publication. In cases

where grantees disseminate their findings through a

variety of media, such as professional journals,

books, and conferences, copies of such publications

should be sent to the Program Manager as they

become available, even if they appear well after a

project's expiration. NIJ imposes no restriction on

such publications other than inclusion of the

following acknowledgment and disclaimer:



This research was supported by grant number        

 from the National Institute of Justice. Points of

view are those of the author(s) and do not

necessarily represent the position of the U.S.

Department of Justice.



Data confidentiality and human subjects protection.

Research that examines individual traits and

experiences plays a vital part in expanding our

knowledge about criminal behavior. It is essential,

however, that researchers protect subjects from

needless risk of harm or embarrassment and proceed

with their willing and informed cooperation. NIJ

requires that investigators protect information

identifiable to research participants. When

information is safeguarded, it is protected by

statute from being used in legal proceedings:



"[S]uch information and copies thereof shall be

immune from legal process, and shall not, without

the consent of the person furnishing such

information, be admitted as evidence or used for

any purpose in any action, suit, or other judicial,

legislative, or administrative proceedings (42

United States Code 3789g)."



Applicants should file their plans to protect

sensitive information as part of their proposal.

Necessary safeguards are detailed in 28 CFR,

paragraph 22. A short "how-to" guideline for

developing a privacy and confidentiality plan can

be obtained from NIJ Program Managers.



In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice has

adopted human subjects policies similar to those

established by the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. If an institutional review board is

necessary for this project, a copy of the board's

approval must be submitted to the National

Institute of Justice prior to the initiation of

data collection. Researchers are encouraged to

review 28 CFR 46, paragraph 46.101, to determine

their individual project requirements.



===============================

Copies of the application forms are available from

NIJ: Call Mr. Riley at 202-616-3234. Or you can

access them for viewing and downloading on the Word

Wide Web (see the listing for "NIJ Application

Forms -Adobe Acrobat File"

URL: http://www.ncjrs.org/fedgrant.htm).

===============================