NIJ Solicition for Policing Research and Evaluation:.
Fiscal Year 1996


MENU TITLE: Solicitation for Policing Research and
Evaluation: Fiscal Year 1996
Series: NIJ Solicitation
Published: May 1996
32 pages
66,002 bytes

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

Solicitation for Policing Research and Evaluation:
Fiscal Year 1996

This request for proposals announces a second year
of evaluation and research support to address
issues articulated in the Public Safety Partnership
and Community Policing Act (Title I) of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the
Crime Act), as well as related areas of law
enforcement. It continues to be responsive to both
Congressional and public demands for police
accountability and to the need for development of a
knowledge base that critically examines and refines
policy and programmatic experience. The request for
proposals builds upon National
Institute of Justice (NIJ) grants awarded under
Title I last year by the Department of Justice's
(DOJ's) Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS) to support:

o Evaluations of strategies for moving departments
further toward community policing.

o Evaluations of problem-solving strategies and
tactics addressing specific crimes.

o Studies of the changing role of the police and
the relationship between the police and the
community.

This second year will also support additional
locally initiated police-researcher partnerships.
In addition, NIJ and COPS have identified two areas
of new and important inquiry: measuring the impact
of the police and police integrity. Studies are
solicited in these areas to improve the
effectiveness of the police.

Introduction

The Crime Act continues to present the Nation with
an unprecedented opportunity to build and improve
the police function, thus making our communities
safer. Title I of the Crime Act, the Public Safety
Partnership and Community Policing Act, responds to
thousands of jurisdictions concerned about
improving public safety and the quality of life in
their communities. This has been done primarily by
authorizing programs to hire police officers to
help move departments further toward community-
oriented policing. 

In order to address the evaluation requirements set
forth in Title I, the National Institute of Justice
awarded 59 grants in fiscal year (FY) 1995. These
grants ranged from a national evaluation of Title I
to a group of longitudinal evaluations of community
policing to 25 locally initiated police-researcher
partnerships. A list of the studies supported in FY
1995 is available on request from the U.S.
Department of Justice Response Center at 800-421-
6770, at 202-307-1480, and by fax at 202-616-9249.

NIJ hereby solicits proposals for a second year of
evaluations and research studies that respond to
these needs, document and assess activity
stimulated by the Crime Act, and are useful to
police departments [see 42 U.S.C. section 3796dd-4,
3793 (c)(11)(B)]. NIJ will continue to collaborate
with COPS in this endeavor. Efforts supported in FY
1996 will build on those funded through NIJūs FY
1995 Policing Research and Evaluation solicitation
by both filling gaps and undertaking new efforts.
This second year of funding will provide up to
$12.5 million for projects that will evaluate
current public safety partnerships and community
policing programs; it will also fund research and
evaluation projects that contribute directly to
improving public safety and policing. 

The ongoing availability of Federal funds to mount
studies and support evaluations of this Federal
initiative should continue to increase the Nationūs
store of practical knowledge about policing. NIJ
invites you to participate in and build on the work
begun in FY 1995 by submitting proposals for
research and evaluation in the areas discussed in
Sections I through VII of this solicitation. An
effort is made in each section to encourage
applicants to build on existing and completed
research. NIJ also welcomes proposals for research
on related topics and evaluations of police
programs, tactics, and strategies that
operationalize the concepts animating the 1994
Crime Act.

I. Evaluations

Evaluations of Strategies for Moving Departments
Further Toward Community Policing

Comparisons are needed of the utility of various
strategies adopted by agencies to implement the
community policing philosophy and operations.
Evaluations should include information on
department goals, community policing plans, and
implementation of those plans. These studies should
describe the investment and implementation process,
analyze how the department and its operations have
changed, and assess the effects of community
policing on crime and fear, citizen satisfaction,
quality of life, and other goals. Assessments of
management and administrative strategies and
procedures supporting community policing are
especially encouraged. An emphasis is being placed
in FY 1996 on building on the base of NIJ's FY 1995
awards and supporting research on topics not
previously examined. Thus, topics for study might
include
evaluations of:

o Programs designed to alter the police
organizational culture to support implementation of
community policing.

o Strategies for collaboration with the local
institutional environment (e.g., agencies of local
government, community
organizations, other public interest groups).

o Recruitment strategies designed to attract
officers who will implement community policing.

o Training programs designed to support the demands
of community policing (e.g., in-service training,
recruit training, community training).

o Technological innovations (e.g., problem-solving
information systems, crime analysis tools).

o Decentralization of police functions (e.g.,
investigations, crime analysis, strategic
decisionmaking).

o Programs focused on minimizing conflict between
specialists and generalists.

o Individual performance measurement schemes.

Evaluations of Problem-Solving Strategies and
Tactics

NIJ will fund evaluations of both common and
innovative strategies, tactics, and programs
mounted by police officers and agencies against
recurrent crime and disorderly conditions. These
evaluations will build on and complement current
studies. Research is needed on the specific
dynamics involved in these problems; evaluations of
particular police responses to them are also
needed.

It is critically important that the research
generate knowledge about the variety of discrete
problems and solutions encompassed within a
category, such as "robbery" or "burglary" -- or
even "ATM robbery" or "house burglary." Practical
information of this kind is required by officers
and citizens who are planning responses to the full
range of problems arising in particular settings. 

The following list of commonly encountered crime
and disorder conditions is intended to build on
completed and ongoing studies and illustrate the
range of NIJ evaluation and research interests
under this section of the solicitation:

o Auto theft (joy riding, carjacking, chop shops).

o Robbery (ATM, street, bank, convenience store).

o Crime rings (new and traditional forms of
criminal infrastructure and enterprises). 

o Crime in special environments (schools, multiple
dwellings, transportation facilities, public
housing, highways, malls).

o Disorder conditions (prostitution, vandalism,
panhandling, public drinking).

o Drug markets (open air, crack houses).

o Family violence (child abuse, spouse assault,
elder abuse). 

o Gangs (violence, victim/witness intimidation).

o Gun violence (youth firearm violence, illegal gun
markets).

Under this section of the solicitation, grants will
be made at a variety of funding levels, for varying
periods of time; they will include evaluations
incorporating interdisciplinary perspectives,
multisite locations, multiple methodologies,
longitudinal studies of selected departments, case
studies, State-by-State or regional impact
analyses, and evaluations of programs, projects,
and other activities supported by the Crime Act. In
addition, grants are available to evaluate programs
similar to, but not supported by, the Act for the
purpose of promoting the implementation of COPS
programs.

NIJ anticipates supporting as many as 12 awards
totaling up to $2 million under this section. 

II. Changing Roles of the Police

Changing Professional and Organizational Roles
Under the
Community-Oriented Policing Philosophy 

Implementation of community-oriented policing in
police departments, sheriffs departments, and other
policing agencies across the country is changing
the roles and goals of law enforcement officers,
who, in turn, are changing the communities they
serve. The National Institute of Justice seeks
proposals for research studies to inform law
enforcement personnel about the ways in which their
profession and organizations are changing as a
result of implementing a community policing model.
This section of the solicitation encourages
proposals that examine the changing structure of
the organization as a whole and the changing role
of certain functions within the organization.
Possible topics include but are not limited to:

o The role bargaining units can play in the
development of a community policing agenda and the
role of memorandums of understanding.

o The police role in victim interaction and
assistance.

o Changes in interactions among justice agencies
and other government and service organizations.

o The impact of community policing on police use of
force.

o The effect of the civilianization of police
departments on the department structure.

o Changes in police/media relations.

o The changing role of detectives.

o The changing roles of middle-level managers
and/or police executives. 

o The potential for an increase or decrease in
police department liability as a result of the
greater discretion granted to patrol officers under
community-oriented policing.

NIJ anticipates supporting as many as 14 awards
totaling up to $2.5 million under this section. 

III. Police and the Community

Police departments have long believed that they
cannot ensure community safety on their own.
Rather, law enforcement and
communities are seen as coproducers of safety and
public order. It is thought that more effective
problem solving in community-oriented policing
occurs when police departments engage communities
to nominate problems to be addressed and make
suggestions on strategies and tactics to be
implemented by the police, other agencies of
government, and the community itself. The
foundation of police-community interaction is built
on the cumulative history of police-citizen
encounters at the neighborhood level. Understanding
the basis for citizen perceptions and
attitudes regarding the police and citizen
willingness to collaborate with police is important
in moving departments toward community policing.
Additional research in this area, particularly on
how "community" is defined in relation to community
policing concerns, needs to be conducted. 

There is a dearth of studies that analyze the types
and degrees of community awareness and
participation in community policing. A considerable
number of people are unaware that their police are
practicing community policing or learn about it
indirectly -- by a flier in the mail or a brief
newspaper article or television story. Research on
police efforts to inform the community, media
cooperation, and community receptivity to community
policing needs to be enhanced.

Research that measures the type and amount of
community participation also needs to be conducted.
Participation can include, but is not limited to,
such activities as letter writing and attendance at
community meetings. Other needed research includes
assessing the degree to which a community desires
to participate with the police in community
policing efforts and is ready or able to do so
(e.g., level of community organization or potential
for organizing). Research on related topics (e.g.,
the capability of a community to organize itself to
work with law enforcement in creating safety and
the ways capability may be influenced by a police
department that actively seeks engagement with the
community) will provide officers and departments
with a clearer notion of how to engage and mobilize
communities. This area may include dimensions of
awareness that affect residents'
willingness to participate.

Little research has been conducted on
community/police interaction issues related to
victims of crime and restorative justice. The
police are typically the victim's first -- and
often only --contact with government. Research is
encouraged on topics that promote a better
understanding of police-community links -- for
example, with regard to restorative activities
(such as community service, mediation, victim
impact assessment, and restitution) -- in serving
victims of crime. 

NIJ will support long-term, multimethod, single- or
multidepartment studies (or groups of studies),
using a range of quantitative and qualitative
methodologies, such as:

o Replications of observational studies in
departments implementing community policing.
Applicants interested in replications of
observational studies can request "The Impact of
Community Policing at the Street Level: An
Observational Study-Report of Research Design and
Methods" from the U.S. Department of Justice
Response Center at 800-421-6770, at 202-307-1480,
and by fax at 202-616-9249. 

o Research on collaborative problem solving between
police and community.

o Studies on community awareness and perception of
community policing.

o Studies on community participation in community
policing.

o Research on the definition of "community" in
community policing.

o Investigations of police interaction with the
public.

o Investigations of police interaction with
political, economic, cultural, media, and private
security agencies.

o Examination of police interaction with victims of
crime and restorative justice initiatives.

o Studies on the correlates and control of officer
misconduct, particularly in community policing.

NIJ encourages applicants to study these issues in
a variety of jurisdictions and police agencies,
including those serving Indian tribes and rural as
well as metropolitan areas. Again, the emphasis in
FY 1996 is on building practical knowledge and
filling gaps in the existing body of research. NIJ
anticipates supporting as many as 12 awards
totaling up to $2 million under this section.

IV. Locally Initiated Research Partnerships

NIJ recognizes that in order for police
practitioners and scholars to continue the
development of the law enforcement profession,
sound research and program evaluations are needed.
Community policing has increased the need for
police executives to use research to define
problems, design solutions, and assess the effects.
Therefore, NIJ will offer grant support for close,
ongoing collaborations between police departments,
sheriffs, or other police agencies and researchers.
Partnerships supported this year will build on the
experience of police-researcher collaborations
begun in FY 1995. Applicants are encouraged to
review NIJ's FY 1995 awards to get a sense of the
variety of partnerships supported. The ultimate
goal of these collaborations should be to benefit
both parties to the partnership during and beyond
the Federal funding period. The partnerships should
provide police departments with a resource for
policy-relevant research and evaluation of law
enforcement programs and strategies. The
partnerships should afford scholars the means and
opportunity to contribute, on an ongoing basis, to
the growing body of knowledge about policing.

Funding under this section of the solicitation is
intended to support the establishment of police
practitioner-researcher partnerships, utilization
of the partnerships to develop a research agenda,
and completion of at least one research project.

NIJ supports a wide range of partnership
structures. For example, a police agency or a
consortium of departments may seek to contract with
a qualified researcher on a full- or part-time
basis; the agency or consortium may propose a
formal department linkage with researchers at local
or regional universities or other academic or
research entities. Research partnerships may also
include other local government, private, and/or
community institutions. A police agency, research
institute, or university would be acceptable as the
grantee organization, but the application must
reflect a genuine police-researcher collaboration.
Applicants must clearly demonstrate a commitment to
the partnership on all sides. 

This solicitation requires that the application
include a task outline for the duration of the
proposed project, with a timeframe that allows for
the completion of an actual research study.
Further, since NIJ believes that documentation of
the development of the partnership is critical
information, the application must include a plan to
create a system to record the establishment,
development, and achievements of the research
collaboration. NIJ is supporting an evaluation of
these locally initiated police
practitioner-researcher partnerships. Grantees in
this program are required to participate in this
evaluation. 

During FY 1996, NIJ expects to fund a number of
partnership projects and will ensure distribution
across size of jurisdiction (large, medium, and
small; urban, suburban, and rural) and
geographic region of the country. Police-researcher
partnerships supported in FY 1995 are eligible to
apply for continuation funding this year. In
addition to standard selection criteria,
continuation applications will depend on
accomplishments to date and need. Up to $2 million
may be awarded for 20 to 40 police-researcher
partnerships. 

V. Measuring the Impact of Police

Historically, police organizational performance has
centered on counts of crime, usually aggregated to
correspond to the boundaries of an agency's
jurisdiction. This focus is usually attributed to
the police professionalism movement and its concern
with crime control as the exclusive function of law
enforcement. Basing judgments of police performance
on aggregate measures of crime has some advantages,
the availability of a standard measure foremost
among them, but may encourage a limited conception
of the role of police.

Recent developments in policing policy and research
suggest a need to reconceptualize measures of
police organizational performance in a way that
more broadly reflects police goals. With the
acceptance of community-centered and problem-
solving approaches to policing, measures that focus
attention on quality of life issues, policing
process and strategies, and indicators of community
satisfaction must be added to the assessment list.
New developments in policing policy and data
management have also emphasized the value of
disaggregated measures for purposes of crime
analysis, "hot-spot" identification, and both
tactical and strategic decisionmaking. There is
also a need to more routinely include measurements
of the context of police organizational performance
in assessments of police impact. Such measures
could include age distribution, employment trends,
and short-term phenomena such as sporting events,
weather, civil disorders, or a gang truce. At
present, no consensus exists regarding how to
improve the measurement of police impact --
including what measures to use, levels of
measurement, and links among measures used. 

This section of the solicitation focuses on the
question: "How do we know a good police department
when we see one?" Proposals are sought that address
general and specific issues concerned with
assessing the impact of police on crime, the
quality of community life, and/or citizen
satisfaction. Innovative methods are needed for
acquiring new types of qualitative and quantitative
data that will inform these analyses. A wide range
of topics could be responsive to this section,
including: 

o How do the police determine their rate of
success? Do they use specific objective measures or
subjective judgments or both, and what are these
measures?

o How do criminals assess the potential of the
police? Do they assess the level of potential
police response prior to committing a crime? If so,
what measures do they use?

o What does the institutional environment (e.g.,
government, interest groups) and the public-at-
large expect of the police, and how does it measure
satisfaction? How and why do these expectations
change over time?

o How is the view of the police influenced by the
media?

o How have police agencies affected crime
longitudinally and/or comparatively?

o What innovative measures of episodic events and
"street level" intelligence can be developed that
will improve both crime analysis and short- and
long-term assessment of police? Events such as a
local disturbance, a new program, a change in laws
or policies, a gang truce, etc., may occur locally
but will not likely appear in any standard
statistical measure. New methodologies are needed
enabling the collection and incorporation of such
short-term, local events into assessments of police
organizational performance. 

NIJ anticipates supporting as many as 10 awards
totaling up to $2 million under this section. 

VI. Police Integrity 

Recent serious incidents throughout the country
have put
significant pressure on the police profession to
respond with constructive ideas and strategies
regarding the integrity and ethics of police
organizations. Two of the goals of community
policing are to enhance community involvement with
individual police officers and their department and
to encourage citizen involvement in addressing
crime and disorder in neighborhoods and cities.
Citizen concerns regarding police integrity and
ethical behavior could seriously hamper
interactions between citizens and police. Thus, it
is incumbent upon police agencies to create an
atmosphere in which high standards of integrity and
ethical behavior endure. 

There is good reason to be concerned with and about
police
integrity as departments move toward community
policing. Police departments represent government's
most visible symbol of justice. Because police
officers are given special powers of arrest, the
authority to use force, and are required to judge
the conduct of citizens, it is not surprising that
charges of misconduct, when leveled at the police,
alarm citizens and cause them to demand an
accounting and a solution.

The issue of police integrity extends far beyond
the concept of the corrupt police officer to
include abuse of police authority (e.g., police
misuse of force). Violations of integrity occur in
police departments not only as a result of
opportunity and greed, but also because policing
culture is especially powerful in obligating group
loyalties that may supersede loyalty to the
department and the law.

This solicitation seeks proposals that will examine
practical applications as well as provide basic
research on broad issues of organizational
integrity and ethics within the profession of
policing. From a broad perspective, the issues of
integrity and ethical behavior have received scant
attention in policing
literature and research efforts. The framework for
examining police integrity and ethical behavior can
be built around several specific issues, including:

o Effects of the police culture on integrity and
ethical behavior.

o Role of police leadership and management in
setting ethical standards and tone in departments.

o Management responses to officer misconduct.

o Efforts to enhance multicultural understanding.

o Efforts to provide training on organizational
values and
policies.

o Citizen complaint resolution reforms.

o Models of management responses to integrity and
ethical issues from other professions and
businesses.

o Integrity and ethics in policing as related to
integrity and ethics in the other components of the
criminal justice system and links between the
components of the system in this area.

o Comparisons of how different police organizations
shape and manage integrity issues both in terms of
style of agency and regional differences. 

o The influence of the ethical climate, both
locally and
nationally, on police organizations.

NIJ anticipates supporting as many as 10 awards
totaling up to $2 million under this section. 

VII. Law Enforcement Family Support

Section 210201 of the Crime Act, "Law Enforcement
Family Support," (42 U.S.C. 3796jj, et seq.) will
assist Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agencies to develop and implement policies and
programs to reduce stress and promote family well-
being through programs of research, training,
technical assistance, and financial support.

The pervasive nature of job-related stress in law
enforcement was highlighted in 1986 when a
nationwide assessment of law enforcement training
needs found that State and local officers in all
types and sizes of agencies ranked the need for
training in personal stress management as the
highest priority. Reported negative consequences
included high rates of alcohol abuse, marital
difficulties, domestic violence, stress-related
health problems, disability retirements, and
ultimately suicide. An increasing number of
departments, particularly in larger jurisdictions,
now operate various forms of stress reduction and
employee assistance programs, in some cases also
making program services available to officersū
families. It should be noted that an important
aspect of the Law Enforcement Family support
legislation is the emphasis it places on family
well-being and the provision of stress reduction
and support services, not only to individual law
enforcement officers, but also to members of their
families. The legislation permits up to 10 percent
of program funds to be used for research and
evaluation. Rigorous studies are needed about the
extent and nature of the problem as it affects
officers, their families, and law enforcement
agencies; the relative effectiveness of different
program elements, particularly cost-effective
approaches; the optimal organizational arrangements
to promote officers' acceptance and use of
services; those services most needed and/or desired
by officers and their families; feasible programs
for small or rural agencies; and research on
organizational contributors to stress. 

One of the purposes of this title of the Act is to
authorize the Attorney General to determine issues
to be researched by the Department of Justice and
grant recipients. NIJ hereby solicits proposals to
construct a long-term research agenda to aid the
development of programs for the reduction of stress
among law enforcement officers and their families.
This agenda should build on the forthcoming Issues
and Practices Report, Developing a Law Enforcement
Stress Program for Officers and Their Families, and
ongoing research being supported by NIJ in this
area. Applicants should also plan to use
information being developed in projects supported
in the related solicitation, Demonstration and
Training Programs for the Reduction of Stress Among
Law Enforcement Officers and Their Families. NIJ
expects to support one award of up to $100,000
under this section of this solicitation. 

Dissemination of Research and Evaluation Findings

NIJ is interested in rapid, innovative methods as
well as those that are more traditional to
disseminate the results of studies and evaluations.
NIJ will be actively pursuing strategies with the
COPS Office to facilitate dissemination of findings
produced through activities supported by this
solicitation. Applicants are
encouraged to include innovative dissemination
ideas in proposals submitted under Sections I
through VII.

Application Information

NIJ wants to encourage new grantees (e.g. small
departments, sheriffs departments, new researchers)
to apply to the various sections of this
solicitation. Crime Act materials and related NIJ
publications and current projects are available
upon request from the U.S. Department of Justice
Response Center at 800-421-6770, at 202-307-1480,
and by fax at 202-616-9249. 

Application Requirements

This section presents general application
information,
recommendations to proposal writers, and
requirements for grant recipients. The application
form, SF 424, is included at the end of this
document. Proposals not conforming to these
application procedures will not be considered.

Award period. In general, NIJ grants and
cooperative agreements are awarded for a period of
up to 24 months. Projects with adequate
justification for longer budget periods are also
considered.

Award amount. Awards totaling up to $12.5 million
will be made available for this NIJ solicitation.

Due date. Ten (10) copies of fully executed
proposals should be sent to the following address: 

FY 1996 Policing Research and Evaluation 
National Institute of Justice 
633 Indiana Avenue N.W., Room 1352 
Washington, DC 20531

Indicate the section of this solicitation to which
the proposal responds:

I. Evaluations 

II. Changing Roles of Police 

III. Police and the Community

IV. Locally Initiated Research Partnerships 

V. Measuring the Impact of Police

VI. Police Integrity 

VII. Law Enforcement Family Support 
 
Completed proposals that respond to Sections I, II,
III, V, VI, and VII must be received at the
National Institute of Justice by the close of
business on July 22, 1996; those responding to
Section IV must be received at the National
Institute of Justice by the close of business on
August 15, 1996. See box on page 2 regarding
deadlines for letters of intent. 

Contact. Applicants are encouraged to contact the
U.S. Department of Justice Response Center to
obtain information about topic viability, data
availability, or proposal content before submitting
proposals and to obtain referrals to NIJ staff. The
Response Center can be reached at 800-421-6770, at
202-307-1480, and by fax at 202-616-9249.

Certifications. Applicants should read and sign the
certification form regarding lobbying; debarment,
suspension, and other
responsibility matters; and drug-free workplace
requirements included in this solicitation. Signing
this form commits the applicant to compliance with
the certification requirements under 28 CFR Part
69, "New Restrictions on Lobbying," and 28 CFR Part
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, Institute staff have
reviewed approximately 1,500 grant applications. On
the basis of those reviews and inquiries from
applicants, the Institute offers the following
recommendations to help potential applicants
present workable, understandable proposals. Many of
these recommendations were adopted from materials
provided to NIJ by the State Justice Institute,
especially for applicants new to NIJ. 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. The Institute
suggests that applicants make certain 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 of
knowledge or state of the science 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. The
Institute 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 publication of
journal articles or 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 should 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 SF 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 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
applicantūs 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, number of persons traveling, number
of trips to be taken, and length of stay. The
estimated costs of travel, lodging, ground
transportation, and other
subsistence should be listed separately. When
combined, 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, appears at the back of this document.
Please follow the instructions carefully. In
addition, complete the Budget Detail Worksheet (OJP
Form 7150/1), OJP Form 4000/3 (Assurances), and OJP
Form 4061/6 (certifications regarding lobbying;
debarment, suspension, and other responsibility
matters; and drug-free workplace requirements).

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. 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 Letters of support from participating agencies.

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 are the deadlines? Completed applications
must be received at NIJ by close of business on
July 22, 1996 for proposals
responding to Sections I, II, III, V, VI, and VII
of this
solicitation; they must be received at NIJ by close
of business on August 15, 1996 for proposals
responding to Section IV. See box on page 2
regarding deadlines for letters of intent. 

16. Is there a page limit? The Institute has
established a limit of 30 double-spaced pages (with
font size not smaller than 12 point) 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:

1. SF 424 (with Assurances attached), followed by
OJP Form 7150/1 (Budget Detail Worksheet), budget
narrative, negotiated rate agreement, and
certifications.

2. 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.

3. Abstract.

4. Table of contents.

5. Project narrative.

6. References.

7. R‚sum‚s 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 applicantsū 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
applicantūs 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 applicantūs 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 the Institute'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? The
Institute will accept resubmission of a previously
submitted proposal. The applicant should indicate
on Question 8, SF 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 findings of the research and the
policy issues those findings will inform. 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 user 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, the
Institute 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 are
governed by the Single Audit Act of 1984 and Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-128,
"Audits of State and Local Governments." Nonprofit
organizations and institutions of higher education
are governed by OMB Circular A-133, "Audits of
Institutions of Higher Education and Other
Nonprofit Institutions." The type of audit required
under these circulars is dependent upon the amount
of Federal funds that can be audited during the
recipient's fiscal year.

For example:

o If the organization receives $100,000 or more per
year in Federal funds, the organization shall have
an organizationwide financial and compliance audit.

o If the organization receives between $25,000 and
$100,000 a year in Federal funds, the organization
may elect to have an
organizationwide audit or program audit.

o If the organization receives less than $25,000 a
year in Federal funds, the organization shall be
exempt from the audit requirement. 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 Circulars A-128 and A-133 apply.

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. The National Institute of Justice 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
goals 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, the National Institute
of Justice 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
Part 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 dialog, with collegiality
and mutual respect. Some of the elements of this
dialog are:

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 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 time frames that have been
agreed upon by NIJ and the grantee. The Institute
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.

Notice: If you are planning to respond to this
solicitation, see the information about the notice
of intent form on the last page.

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

NIJ has also issued a solicitation for proposals
pertaining to technology research and development
partnership projects for community policing.
Proposals are expected to describe research and
development efforts to move technologies in support
of community-oriented policing beyond the state of
the art. Those efforts are to reflect work by
partnerships between public and private sectors;
e.g., between a police department and one or more
private companies or academic institutions.
Completed proposals must be received at the
National Institute of Justice by the close of
business on August 1, 1996. For a copy of
Solicitation for Technology Research and
Development Partnerships Projects for Community
Policing, please contact the National Criminal
Justice Reference Service at 1-800-851-3420.


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

NIJ is trying to streamline its process to
accommodate the volume of proposals anticipated
under this and other Crime Act
solicitations. Researchers can help in a
significant way by sending NIJ a nonbinding letter
of intent by June 28, 1996, for proposals submitted
under Section I, II, III, V, VI, and VII and by
July 26, 1996, for proposals addressing Section IV
of this solicitation. The Institute will use these
letters to forecast the number of peer panels it
needs and to identify conflicts of interest among
potential reviewers. There are two ways to send
these "letters." You can reach NIJ by Internet by
sending e-mail to tellnij@ncjrs.org and identifying
the solicitation and section(s) you expect to apply
for. You can write a letter with the same
information to Solicitation for Policing Research
and Evaluation: Fiscal Year 1996, 633 Indiana
Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20531. Help us help
you.

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

The National Institute of Justice is issuing an
additional solicitation this year on the topic of
law enforcement family support under Title XXI of
the 1994 Crime Act. The purpose of this related
effort is to develop and demonstrate (a) exemplary
models of innovative stress reduction programs for
State and local law enforcement personnel and their
families, or, alternatively, (b) a model training
program, with a strategy for disseminating it
nationally, that State and local law enforcement
agencies can use in training their trainers in how
to establish effective stress reduction programs.
Respondents interested in this related effort are
encouraged to obtain a copy of NIJ's solicitation,
Demonstration and Training Programs for the
Reduction of Stress Among Law Enforcement Officers
and Their Families, by contacting the U.S.
Department of Justice Response Center at
800-421-6770, at 202-307-1480, or by fax at
202-616-9249.
---------------------------------------------------
----------------

TO OBTAIN APPLICATION FORMS, PLEASE CALL THE 
NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFERENCE SERVICE,
800-851-3420.