15saki-ttasol.pdf

OMB No. 1121-0329

U.S. Department of Justice Approval Expires 07/31/2016

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is seeking applications for funding to support national training and technical assistance for jurisdictions engaged in comprehensive sexual assault response reform related to the issue of unsubmitted sexual assault kits. This program furthers the Department’s mission by improving state and local jurisdictions response to violent crime and improving the functioning of the criminal justice system.

The Sexual Assault Kit Initiative:

National Training and Technical Assistance FY 2015 Competitive Grant Announcement

Eligibility Eligible applicants are for-profit organizations, nonprofit organizations (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), faith-based and community organizations, institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education), and consortiums with demonstrated experience providing national and local-level training and technical assistance. For-profit organizations must agree to waive any profit or fees for services.

BJA welcomes applications that involve two or more entities; however, one eligible entity must be the applicant and the others must be proposed as subrecipients. The applicant must be the entity with primary responsibility for administering the funding and managing the entire program.

Only one application per lead applicant will be considered; however, subrecipients may be part of multiple proposals

BJA may elect to make awards for applications submitted under this solicitation in future fiscal years, dependent on the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations.

For additional eligibility information, see Section C. Eligibility Information.

Deadline Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 7, 2015.

All applicants are encouraged to read this Important Notice: Applying for Grants in

Grants.gov.

For additional information, see How to Apply in Section D. Application and Submission Information.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ http://www.bja.gov/ http://www.bja.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Grants-govInfo.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Grants-govInfo.htm

BJA-2015-4116

Contact Information For technical assistance with submitting an application, contact the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800-518-4726 or 606-545-5035, or via e-mail to support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Support Hotline hours of operation are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except federal holidays.

Applicants that experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond their control that prevent them from submitting their application by the deadline must e-mail the BJA contact identified below within 24 hours after the application deadline and request approval to submit their application. Additional information on reporting technical issues is found under “Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues” in the How to Apply section.

For assistance with any other requirement of this solicitation, contact the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Response Center: toll-free at 1-800-851-3420; via TTY at 301-240-6310 (hearing impaired only); email responsecenter@ncjrs.gov; fax to 301-240-5830;

or web chat at https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. The NCJRS Response Center hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. eastern time on the solicitation close date.

Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: BJA-2015-4116

Release date: March 9, 2015 mailto:support@grants.gov http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp mailto:responsecenter@ncjrs.gov https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp

Contents A. Program Description

Overview

Program-Specific Information

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables

Evidence-Based Programs or Practices

B. Federal Award Information

Type of Award

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

Budget Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

C. Eligibility Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

Limit on Number of Application Submissions

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

How to Apply

E. Application Review Information

Selection Criteria

Review Process

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

H. Other Information

Provide Feedback to OJP

Application Checklist

The Sexual Assault Kit Initiative:

National Training and Technical Assistance

(CFDA #16.833)

A. Program Description

Overview The Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI), administered by BJA, provides funding through a competitive grant program to support multidisciplinary community response teams engaged in the comprehensive reform of jurisdictions’ approaches to sexual assault cases resulting from evidence found in previously unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs). Unsubmitted kits (those in in police custody or other evidence storage locations that have never been submitted to a crime laboratory for testing) and untested kits (those that have been submitted to crime labs but are delayed for testing (e.g., as a result of a backlog of work in the laboratory) are separate and distinct issues. The focus of this effort is on those unsubmitted kits that have never been submitted to a crime laboratory.

The goal of SAKI is the creation of a coordinated community response that ensures just resolution to these cases whenever possible through a comprehensive and victim-centered approach, as well as to build jurisdictions’ capacity to prevent high numbers of unsubmitted SAKs in the future. This program provides jurisdictions with resources to address their unsubmitted SAK issue, including support to inventory, test, and track SAKs; create and report performance metrics; access necessary training to increase effectiveness in addressing the complex issues associated with these cases and engage in multidisciplinary policy development, implementation and coordination; and improve practices related to investigation, prosecution, and victim engagement, advocacy, and support in connection with evidence and cases resulting from the testing process.

Research supported by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) on unsubmitted SAKs at pilot sites in Detroit, Michigan and Houston, Texas has confirmed the value of testing unsubmitted sexual assault kits in solving sexual assault cases.1 It has also highlighted the complexity of the issue.

Unsubmitted SAKs in the custody of law enforcement agencies can be attributed to a wide range of factors, including poor evidence tracking, outdated and ineffective investigation practices, misunderstanding of crime lab case acceptance policies, and lack of understanding among law enforcement about the value of testing kits in various types of cases.2, 3 This recent research identified the need for more trained investigative and prosecutorial resources to deal with the increased number of investigations and prosecutions resulting from testing a high number of previously unsubmitted SAKs, as well as the importance of linking victims to needed services. Thus, the critical needs around this issue extend well beyond testing kits and

1 Comprehensive findings from these studies are forthcoming. For additional information about the Detroit and Houston SAK action research pilot sites, please see the additional information resources listed on page 9 of this solicitation.

2 Strom, Kevin J., Jeri Ropero-Miller, Shelton Jones, Nathan Sikes, Mark Pope and Nicole Horstmann, The 2007 Survey of Law Enforcement Forensic Evidence Processing (pdf, 81 pages), Final Report, Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, September 2009, 228415.

3 Harvard Kennedy School Webinar: Taking on the Challenge of Unsubmitted Sexual Assault Kits, October 31, 2014.

increasing crime lab capacity; this program also addresses the investigative and prosecutorial aspects of sexual assault cases resulting from the testing and enhancing provision of victim services.

There is currently no reliable estimate for the number of unsubmitted kits in the custody of law enforcement agencies nationwide. As noted in a 2011 NIJ Special Report, the problem in assessing the scope is complicated by the fact that some police departments may have deficient evidence tracking, storage, and retention policies, protocols, and facilities.4 Furthermore, unsubmitted SAKs may be located in places other than police evidence rooms, including hospitals, clinics, rape crisis centers, and unofficial evidence retention locations.

In addition, many law enforcement agencies lack electronic systems to track evidence and encounter data sharing obstacles to exchanging information about DNA “hits” among police, prosecutors, and crime labs in a seamless and real-time basis. It is important to not only support grant sites directly to meet these challenges while reducing the number of unsubmitted SAKs, but also to provide training and technical assistance (TTA) to jurisdictions grappling with this issue to achieve the long term goals of improving our national response to sexual assault.

This competitive grant announcement specifically requests applications for one national TTA provider to support and build capacity in the field and among those jurisdictions selected to receive SAKI funding and other jurisdictions facing similar conditions. This grant announcement does not solicit applications from individual jurisdictions to fund local SAKI projects.

This initiative is funded by the Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 113-235).

Program-Specific Information The purpose of this announcement is to select one TTA provider to deliver, nationwide, a wide range of TTA services to SAKI grantees; however, given the complexity and diversity of the tasks applicants are strongly urged to partner with other relevant providers. These services include, but are not limited to, training sessions and educational sessions developed and conducted by relevant subject-matter experts (SMEs), onsite or remote guidance on SAK-related issues including inventory, testing, and tracking of SAKs; creation and reporting of performance metrics; gaining access to necessary training to increase effectiveness in addressing the complex issues associated with these cases; and engaging in multidisciplinary coordination, investigation, prosecution, and victim advocacy, engagement, and support in connection with evidence and cases resulting from the testing process.

SAKI site-based grantees will leverage the TTA to plan and implement strategies to inventory, test, and track unsubmitted SAKs; launch coordinated community based sexual assault response reforms;; and engage relevant community stakeholders in the reform process. The national TTA provider will leverage existing TTA resources available through OJP5 and DOJ’s Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) in addition to creating tailored TTA tools to fill existing resource gaps. It is anticipated that BJA will be making competitive awards (through a separate solicitation) to approximately 12 local jurisdictions in FY 2015 to become SAKI sites.

Additional site based awards may be made in the future, dependent on the availability of appropriations.

4 Ritter, Nancy. (2011) The Road Ahead: Unanalyzed Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

5 Such TTA resources include the Office for Victims of Crime’s Training and Technical Assistance Center (TTAC), as well as TTA resources housed within NIJ.

The SAKI National TTA Program will provide direct assistance to jurisdictions that receive funding through the SAKI program and will provide targeted TTA in support of their initiatives as well as other jurisdictions engaged in reform efforts as resources allow. Given the complex, multidisciplinary nature of the TTA required to support SAKI projects (i.e., subject-matter expertise that includes the fields of health care, forensic science, policing, prosecution, and victim services), applicants are encouraged to establish formalized partnerships or consortia with one or more qualified expert organization(s) in support of a comprehensive TTA program.

Such partnerships should provide ready access to high quality TTA in all areas covered by this solicitation and the SAKI program.

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables The goal of the SAKI TTA Program is to support the needs of local SAKI sites and, as resources allow, other jurisdictions engaged in community based sexual assault reform.

The objectives of SAKI TTA are to:

Assist SAKI sites in implementing evidence-based activities in their efforts to address existing challenges related to unsubmitted SAKs and sexual assault response reform.6

Engage proactively with SAKI grantees to monitor progress toward achieving programmatic goals, address challenges, and identify solutions.

Communicate regularly with BJA to assess the impact of TTA services on SAKI program goals and individual site progress.

Provide TTA to other jurisdictions interested in improving their response to sexual assault through evidence-based practices.

In collaboration with ongoing efforts underway at OJP and stakeholder organizations, assist in the development, implementation, and dissemination of best practices, policies, and protocols for addressing systemic failures that lead to large numbers of untested kits and preventing those failures from reoccurring in the future.

Specifically, applicants should address how they will provide the following deliverables:

Provide ongoing TTA (both remote and onsite) to the SAKI site-based grantees throughout the duration of their BJA grant awards, and as resources allow, provide SAKI TTA to non-grantee jurisdictions when requested. Examples of TTA include, but are not limited to, assisting with project implementation challenges, facilitating partnerships with relevant stakeholders, sustainment planning, and assisting with any other issue that may hinder a site’s progress or sustainment of activities beyond the life of the grant. Specifically, BJA seeks a national TTA provider to make available:

o Instruction for law enforcement personnel regarding the benefits and use of forensic evidence, including protocols for sending cases to the lab for analysis and receiving and handling the forensic evidence results.

o Training for law enforcement, first responders, victim advocates, and other relevant stakeholders in relation to sexual assault evidence collection, DNA technology, 6 BJA expects to award funding to approximately 12 sites in FY 2015, with the possibility of additional sites receiving awards in the future based on available appropriations. The TTA provider will be expected to provide assistance to all SAKI sites regardless of fiscal year in which the awards are made.

victimization and trauma response, and other related topics to improve the quality and outcomes of sexual assault investigations, prosecutions, and victim experiences.

o Training to improve investigative and prosecutorial practices when forensic sexual assault evidence is available.

o Training to optimize victim notification protocols and techniques as well as follow-up support for victims.

o Technical assistance to identify challenges related to outsourcing, technical review of data and CODIS uploads of results produced by private labs, current in-house standard operating procedures that contribute to deficiencies in the DNA screening and testing process, and to identify solutions to promote greater efficiency. Such assistance should include support for public labs’ implementation of sustainable automated and streamlined SAK processing procedures to ensure long-term capacity and efficiency.

o Technical assistance to identify additional funding resources that can be leveraged to further reduce or eliminate the number of untested SAKs in a jurisdiction.

o TTA to enable or enhance the SAK inventory, testing, tracking, and case management processes, to include technical assistance in accessing and implementing evidence tracking and case management technology.

o Technical assistance to establish specialized cold case or sexual assault investigation units, or response teams, focused on the coordinated community response to unsubmitted SAKs and the investigations resulting from increased testing.

o Model protocols, policies, and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) templates that assist sites in establishing and sustaining effective management structures and partnerships in support of their SAKI project, and proactive dissemination such model guidance among grantees, other stakeholders, and the criminal justice field at large.

Recruit, maintain, and use a cadre of SMEs to assist agencies with technical assistance needs; schedule and organize training venues; market trainings and recruit participants;

administer and oversee implementation of the trainings; and coordinate TTA and SME activities with BJA’s National Training and Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC) and other TTA resources housed within OJP and OVW.

Formally partner with organizations as needed whose expertise and experience can best meet grant recipients’ needs when said expertise is not present within the primary TTA provider’s organization.

Ensure SAKI grant recipient (and, as resources allow, other jurisdictions’) accountability and transparency as it relates to sexual assault response, evidence collection, and analysis by providing guidance on how to properly account for the number of SAKs that remain in their possession; track the processing of SAKs through the criminal justice system; and produce best practices and model policies for inventorying, tracking, and maintaining accountability for SAKs.

Develop uniform TTA request and response protocols for all active SAKI grantees as well as non-grantee agencies seeking assistance. Provide education and proactive, comprehensive, user-friendly TTA via teleconferencing, peer-to-peer consultations, onsite assistance, web-based assistance, and follow-up TTA as required by phone and/or e-mail.

Assist BJA with ongoing assessment of SAKI site progress by holding monthly calls with grantee agencies; assisting them with the development, validation, and submission of performance metrics to BJA; and producing reports outlining SAKI site progress and results.

Assign at least one SME liaison to each SAKI grantee to monitor and report on the TTA needs, including a summary of the findings for the grantee and recommended next steps to improve program performance. The awarded applicant must provide follow-up information regarding the grantee implementation of the recommendations that were provided.

Design and support a web site which houses model policies, protocols, research, publications, best practices, training materials, and other relevant web-based resources.

The web site should serve as a one-stop-shop for information on SAK collection, storage, inventory, testing, tracking, and best practices in terms of investigation, prosecution, victim advocacy, victim notification and support, and related topics as agreed to by the provider and BJA.

Develop publications and a comprehensive resource kit for jurisdictions interested in implementing evidence-based activities to inventory and reduce the number of unsubmitted SAKs in their possession, and engage in comprehensive community-based sexual assault response reform. These information resources must identify common obstacles and lessons learned by sites in this process, provide guidance to overcoming such challenges to comprehensive reform, and be actively disseminated among SAKI sites and (as resources allow) other jurisdictions as requested. Specific information may include, but is not limited to:

o Primary reasons for untested SAKs at the sites o Information about the criminal behavior of sexual assault perpetrators indicated by testing results from sites o Cost estimates for SAKI activities based on experiences of the sites o Types of protocols previously absent and subsequently developed through the initiative o Model legislation developed to remedy statute of limitations and other legal barriers o The SAK testing and follow-up investigation process, including case outcomes o Model approaches to victim notification, advocacy, and engagement in cases involving previously unsubmitted SAKs

Assist BJA in conducting national and/or regional meetings or other educational sessions for existing grantees and other agencies during the 36-month project period, and attend national meetings, conferences, and other events to highlight the initiative and disseminate available resources.

Review site inventory results and certifications, and provide assistance to BJA and SAKI sites as needed in relation to the SAK inventory and certification process.

Provide guidance on addressing statute of limitations issues; testing protocols; investigation practices; policies and procedures related to previously closed cases that are subsequently reopened as a result of new evidence obtained through the SAK testing process; and other issues as required by BJA and SAKI sites.

Provide in-depth and ongoing analysis of data related to SAKI grantee performance measures and programmatic activity that provides information on the initiative’s strengths and weaknesses, changes in policies and protocols, and resulting effect on practice;

identified perpetrators; patterns of serial sexual offenses; victim participation; and other elements as required by BJA. The awarded applicant will also be expected to use data submitted by SAKI sites to assist them in tracking the progress and outcomes of their project efforts.

The TTA provider also will be required to participate in BJA’s GrantStat for specified grantees.

Through GrantStat, BJA management and staff examine the performance of the grant programs funded by BJA by tracking grantee or program performance along several key indicators.

GrantStat calls for the collection and analysis of performance data and other relevant grant-level information that enables BJA as well as our partners to be held accountable for the grantees and programs performance as measured against the program’s goals and objectives

Evidence-Based Programs or Practices OJP strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program development in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. OJP is committed to:

Improving the quantity and quality of evidence OJP generates

Integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the field

Improving the translation of evidence into practice

OJP considers programs and practices to be evidence-based when their effectiveness has been demonstrated by causal evidence, generally obtained through one or more outcome evaluations. Causal evidence documents a relationship between an activity or intervention

(including technology) and its intended outcome, including measuring the direction and size of a change, and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention. Causal evidence depends on the use of scientific methods to rule out, to the extent possible, alternative explanations for the documented change. The strength of causal evidence, based on the factors described above, will influence the degree to which OJP considers a program or practice to be evidence-based. The OJP CrimeSolutions.gov web site is one resource that applicants may use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services.

Applicants may want to consult the following resources when preparing their application regarding evidence-based approaches to sexual assault forensic testing issues and community based sexual assault reform:

Why Were So Many Sexual Assault Kits Not Tested in Detroit?

Detroit Sexual Assault Kit Action Research Project

Houston Sexual Assault Kit Research Website

A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations: Adults/Adolescents

New Orleans Sexual Assault Evidence Project: Results and Recommendations

Los Angeles Sexual Assault Kit Study

Social Science Research on Forensic Science Topical Working Group Meeting Washington, DC, January 23–24, 2013

Summary of the Proceedings on Eliminating the Rape Kit Backlog: A Roundtable to Explore a Victim-Centered Approach held May 11-12, 2010 http://www.crimesolutions.gov/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iui_vnoPDU0&list=PLpIlUxHJ-xboOhqSpXW-q4OWivPHTr8Mj http://nij.gov/topics/forensics/Documents/social-science-forensics-campbell.pdf http://houstonsakresearch.org/ https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ovw/241903.pdf http://www.nij.gov/journals/272/Pages/sexual-assault-evidence.aspx https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/238483.pdf http://www.nij.gov/topics/forensics/pages/social-science-research-meeting.aspx http://www.nij.gov/topics/forensics/pages/social-science-research-meeting.aspx http://www.victimsofcrime.org/docs/dna-resource-center-documents/eliminating-the-rape-kit-backlog---a-roundtable-to-explore-a-victim-centered-approach-%282010%29.pdf?sfvrsn=6 http://www.victimsofcrime.org/docs/dna-resource-center-documents/eliminating-the-rape-kit-backlog---a-roundtable-to-explore-a-victim-centered-approach-%282010%29.pdf?sfvrsn=6

B. Federal Award Information

BJA estimates that it will make up to one award up to $6 million for a 36-month project period project period, beginning on October 1, 2015.

BJA may, in certain cases, provide supplemental funding in future years to awards under this solicitation. Important considerations in decisions regarding supplemental funding include, among other factors, the availability of funding, strategic priorities, assessment of the quality of the management of the award (for example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and assessment of the progress of the work funded under the award.

All awards are subject to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements that may be imposed by law.

Type of Award7 BJA expects that it will make any award from this solicitation in the form of a cooperative agreement, which is a particular type of grant used if BJA expects to have ongoing substantial involvement in award activities. Substantial involvement includes direct oversight and involvement with the grantee organization in implementation of the grant, but does not involve day-to-day project management. See Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements, under Section F. Federal Award Administration Information, for details regarding the federal involvement anticipated under an award from this solicitation.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls If selected for funding, the award recipient must:

(a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

(b) Comply with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards.

(c) Evaluate and monitor the non-federal entity's compliance with statute, regulations and the terms and conditions of federal awards.

(d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including noncompliance identified in audit findings.

(e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable information and other information the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity designates as

7 See generally 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301-6305 (defines and describes various forms of federal assistance relationships, including grants and cooperative agreements (a type of grant)).

sensitive or the non-federal entity considers sensitive consistent with applicable federal, state and local laws regarding privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

In order to better understand administrative requirements and cost principles, award applicants are encouraged to enroll, at no charge, in the Department of Justice Grants Financial Management Online Training available here.

Budget Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement This solicitation does not require a match. However, if a successful application proposes a voluntary match amount, and OJP approves the budget, the total match amount incorporated into the approved budget becomes mandatory and subject to audit.

Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals OJP does not typically approve pre-agreement costs; an applicant must request and obtain the prior written approval of OJP for all such costs. If approved, pre-agreement costs could be paid from grant funds consistent with a grantee’s approved budget, and under applicable cost standards. However, all such costs prior to award and prior to approval of the costs are incurred at the sole risk of an applicant. Generally, no applicant should incur project costs before submitting an application requesting federal funding for those costs. Should there be extenuating circumstances that appear to be appropriate for OJP’s consideration as pre-agreement costs, the applicant should contact the point of contact listed on the title page of this announcement for details on the requirements for submitting a written request for approval. See the section on Costs Requiring Prior Approval in the Financial Guide, for more information.

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver With respect to any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation, recipients may not use federal funds to pay total cash compensation (salary plus cash bonuses) to any employee of the award recipient at a rate that exceeds 110 percent of the maximum annual salary payable to a member of the Federal Government’s Senior Executive Service (SES) at an agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.8 The 2015 salary table for SES employees is available on the Office of Personnel Management web site. Note: A recipient may compensate an employee at a greater rate, provided the amount in excess of this compensation limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Any such additional compensation will not be considered matching funds where match requirements apply.)

The Assistant Attorney General for OJP may exercise discretion to waive, on an individual basis, the limitation on compensation rates allowable under an award. An applicant requesting a waiver should include a detailed justification in the budget narrative of the application. Unless the applicant submits a waiver request and justification with the application, the applicant should anticipate that OJP will request the applicant to adjust and resubmit the budget.

The justification should include the particular qualifications and expertise of the individual, the uniqueness of the service the individual will provide, the individual’s specific knowledge of the program or project being undertaken with award funds, and a statement explaining that the

8 This limitation on use of award funds does not apply to the non-profit organizations specifically named at Appendix VIII to 2 C.F.R. part 200.

http://gfm.webfirst.com/ http://ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/15Tables/exec/html/ES.aspx individual’s salary is commensurate with the regular and customary rate for an individual with his/her qualifications and expertise, and for the work to be done.

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs OJP strongly encourages applicants that propose to use award funds for any conference-, meeting-, or training-related activity to review carefully – before submitting an application – the OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting available at www.ojp.gov/financialguide/PostawardRequirements/chapter15page1.htm. OJP policy and guidance (1) encourage minimization of conference, meeting, and training costs; (2) require prior written approval (which may affect project timelines) of most such costs for cooperative agreement recipients and of some such costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, including a general prohibition of all food and beverage costs.

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) If an applicant proposes a program or activity that would deliver services or benefits to individuals, the costs of taking reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to those services or benefits for individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable. Reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to services or benefits may include interpretation or translation services where appropriate.

For additional information, see the "Civil Rights Compliance" section under “Solicitation Requirements” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

C. Eligibility Information For additional eligibility information, see Title page.

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement For additional information on cost sharing and match requirement, see Section B. Federal Award Information.

Limit on Number of Application Submissions If an applicant submits multiple versions of the same application, BJA will review only the most recent system-validated version submitted. For more information on system-validated versions, see How to Apply.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include Applicants should anticipate that if they fail to submit an application that contains all of the specified elements, it may negatively affect the review of their application; and, should a decision be made to make an award, it may result in the inclusion of special conditions that preclude the recipient from accessing or using award funds pending satisfaction of the conditions.

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications that are determined to be nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation, or that do not include the application elements that BJA has designated to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. Under this solicitation, BJA designated the following application elements as http://www.ojp.gov/financialguide/PostawardRequirements/chapter15page1.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, and Budget Narrative. Applicants may combine the Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant submits only one budget document, it must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats.

OJP strongly recommends that applicants use appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., “Program Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative,” “Timelines,” “Memoranda of Understanding,” “Resumes”) for all attachments. Also, OJP recommends that applicants include resumes in a single file.

1. Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)

The SF-424 is a required standard form used as a cover sheet for submission of pre-applications, applications, and related information. Grants.gov and OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS) take information from the applicant’s profile to populate the fields on this form. When selecting "type of applicant," if the applicant is a for-profit entity, select "For-Profit Organization" or "Small Business" (as applicable).

Intergovernmental Review: This funding opportunity (program) is not subject to Executive Order 12372. (In completing the SF-424, applicants are to make the appropriate selection in response to question 19 to indicate that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.”)

2. Project Abstract Applications should include a high-quality project abstract that summarizes the proposed project in 400 words or less. Project abstracts should be—

Written for a general public audience

Submitted as a separate attachment with “Project Abstract” as part of its file name

Single-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman) with 1-inch margins

As a separate attachment, the project abstract will not count against the page limit for the program narrative.

All project abstracts should follow the detailed template available at ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/ProjectAbstractTemplate.pdf.

Permission to Share Project Abstract with the Public: It is unlikely that BJA will be able to fund all promising applications submitted under this solicitation, but it may have the opportunity to share information with the public regarding promising but unfunded applications, for example, through a listing on a webpage available to the public. The intent of this public posting would be to allow other possible funders to become aware of such proposals.

In the project abstract template, applicants are asked to indicate whether they give OJP permission to share their project abstract (including contact information) with the public.

Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not affect OJP’s funding decisions, and, if the application is not funded, granting permission will not guarantee that abstract information will be shared, nor will it guarantee funding from any other source.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/ProjectAbstractTemplate.pdf

Note: OJP may choose not to list a project that otherwise would have been included in a listing of promising but unfunded applications, should the abstract fail to meet the format and content requirements noted above and outlined in the project abstract template.

3. Program Narrative The program narrative must respond to the Selection Criteria in the order given. Applications are peer reviewed and scored on answers to the Selection Criteria. The program narrative should be double-spaced, using standard 12-point font (Times New Roman is preferred) with 1-inch margins, and should not exceed 15 pages. Number pages “1 of 15’, “2 of 15” etc.

If the program narrative fails to comply with these length-related restrictions, BJA may consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions.

The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative:

a. Statement of the Problem

b. Project Design and Implementation

c. Capabilities and Competencies

d. Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures

To assist the Department with fulfilling its responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation must provide data that measure the results of their work done under this solicitation. OJP will require any award recipient, post award, to provide the data requested in the “Data Grantee Provides” column so that OJP can calculate values for the “Performance Measures” column. Post award, recipients will be required to submit performance metric data quarterly through BJA’s online Training and Technical Assistance Reporting Portal located at www.bjatraining.org.

Below are some sample performance measures:

Objectives Performance Measure Data Grantee Provides

Provision of training to effectively reduce the number of untested and unsubmitted SAKs in a jurisdiction’s custody and improve the quality of sexual assault investigations, prosecutions, and victims support by training investigators and prosecutors on topics related to forensics, victim engagement and response, investigation and prosecution best practices.

Number of trainings conducted

Number of participants who attend the training

Percentage of participants who successfully completed the training

Percentage of participants who rated the training as satisfactory or better

For the current reporting period:

Number of trainings (by type):

In-person

Web-based

CD/DVD

Peer-to-peer

Workshop Number of individuals who:

Attended the training (in-person) or started the training (web-based)

Completed the training

Completed an evaluation at the conclusion of the training

Completed an evaluation and rated the training as satisfactory or better

Completed the post-test with an improved score over their pre-test http://www.bjatraining.org/

Percentage of participants trained and subsequently demonstrated performance improvement

Percentage of scholarship recipients surveyed who reported that the training provided information that could be utilized in their job

Number of curricula developed

Number of curricula that were pilot tested

Percentage of curricula that were revised after pilot testing

For the current reporting period, number of individuals who:

Received a scholarship

Completed the training

Completed a survey at the conclusion of the training

Reported the training provided information that could be utilized in their job

Number of training curricula:

Developed

Pilot tested

Revised after being pilot tested

Provision of technical assistance to SAKI grantees and other jurisdictions to reduce the number of unsubmitted and untested SAKs in their possession and facilitate comprehensive sexual assault response reform.

Percentage of requesting agencies who rated services as satisfactory or better

Percentage of requesting agencies that were planning to implement one or more recommendations

For the current reporting period:

Number of onsite visits completed

Number of reports submitted to requesting agencies after onsite visits

Number of requesting agencies who completed an evaluation of services

Number of agencies who rated the services a satisfactory or better

a) in terms of timeliness

b) quality

Number of follow-ups with requesting agencies completed 6 months after onsite visit

Number of agencies that were planning to implement at least one or more recommendations 6 months after the onsite visit

Facilitate peer to peer exchanges to assist SAKI grantees and other jurisdictions in implementing best practices in SAK testing and sexual assault response reform.

Percentage of peer visitors who reported that the visit to the other agency was useful in providing information on policies or practices

Percentage of peer visitors that were planning to implement one or more policies or practices 6 months after they were observed at the visited site

Percentage of requesting agencies of other onsite services who rated the services provided as satisfactory or better

Number of peer-to-peer visits completed

Number of peer visitors who completed an evaluation

Number of peer visitors who reported that the visit was useful in providing information on policies or practices

Number of follow-ups with the requesting peer visitor completed 6 months after the peer-to-peer visit

Number of peer visitors who were planning to implement at least one or more recommendations 6 months after the onsite visit

Number of other onsite services provided

Number of requesting agencies who completed an evaluation of other onsite services

Number of agencies who rated the services a satisfactory or better

Increase information provided to BJA and the criminal justice community.

Number of conferences or advisory/focus groups held

Percentage of advisory/focus groups evaluated as satisfactory or better

Number of publications developed

Number of publications disseminated

Percent of web sites developed and maintained

Percent increase in the number of visits to web sites

Percentage of information requests responded to

For the current reporting period:

Number of conferences or advisory/focus groups held

Number of conference or advisory/focus group attendees who completed an evaluation

Number of conference or advisory/focus group attendees who rated the advisory/focus group as satisfactory or better

Number of publications/resources developed

Number of publications/ resources disseminated

Number of web sites developed

Number of web sites maintained

Number of visits to web sites during the current reporting period

Number of visits to web sites during the previous reporting period

Number of information requests

Number of information requests responded to

BJA does not require applicants to submit performance measures data with their application. Performance measures are included as an alert that BJA will require successful applicants to submit specific data as part of their reporting requirements. For the application, applicants should indicate an understanding of these requirements and discuss how they will gather the required data, should they receive funding.

Note on Project Evaluations Applicants that propose to use funds awarded through this solicitation to conduct project evaluations should be aware that certain project evaluations (such as systematic investigations designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge) may constitute “research” for purposes of applicable DOJ human subjects protection regulations. However, project evaluations that are intended only to generate internal improvements to a program or service, or are conducted only to meet OJP’s performance measure data reporting requirements likely do not constitute “research.”

Applicants should provide sufficient information for OJP to determine whether the particular project they propose would either intentionally or unintentionally collect and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ regulatory definition of research.

Research, for the purposes of human subjects protections for OJP-funded programs, is defined as, “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge” 28 C.F.R. § 46.102(d). For additional information on determining whether a proposed activity would constitute research, see the decision tree to assist applicants on the “Research and the Protection of Human Subjects” section of the OJP Funding Resource Center web page (ojp.gov/funding/Explore/SolicitationRequirements/EvidenceResearchEvaluationRequire ments.htm). Applicants whose proposals may involve a research or statistical component also should review the “Data Privacy and Confidentiality Requirements” section on that web page.

http://ojp.gov/funding/Explore/SolicitationRequirements/EvidenceResearchEvaluationRequirements.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/Explore/SolicitationRequirements/EvidenceResearchEvaluationRequirements.htm

4. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative

a. Budget Detail Worksheet A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. Applicants that submit their budget in a different format should include the budget categories listed in the sample budget worksheet.

For questions pertaining to budget and examples of allowable and unallowable costs, see the Financial Guide at www.ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm.

b. Budget Narrative Applicants should budget for hosting three 2-day SAKI grantee meetings during the 36-month period. The meetings may be held in Washington, DC area or other regions of the country.

The budget narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category of expense listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. OJP expects proposed budgets to be complete, cost effective, and allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary for project activities).

Applicants should demonstrate in their budget narratives how they will maximize cost effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the project. For example, a budget narrative should detail why planned in-person meetings are necessary, or how technology and collaboration with outside organizations could be used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.

The narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond with the information and figures provided in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how the applicant estimated and calculated all costs, and how they are relevant to the completion of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes but need not be in a spreadsheet format. As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative should be broken down by year.

c. Non-Competitive Procurement Contracts In Excess of Simplified Acquisition Threshold If an applicant proposes to make one or more non-competitive procurements of products or services, where the non-competitive procurement will exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (also known as the small purchase threshold), which is currently set at $150,000, the application should address the considerations outlined in the Financial Guide.

d. Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals For information on pre-agreement costs, see Section B. Federal Award Information.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs are allowed only if the applicant has a current federally…