15sakisol.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 address the issue of unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) at law enforcement agencies. 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.

National Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI) FY 2015 Competitive Grant Announcement

Eligibility Eligible applicants are state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies, prosecutor’s offices, or a governmental non-law enforcement agency acting as fiscal agent for the applicant.

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 lead applicant must be a state, local, or tribal law enforcement agency, prosecutor’s office, or a governmental non-law enforcement agency acting as fiscal agent for the applicant and 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.

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 http://www.justice.gov/ http://www.ojp.gov/ https://www.bja.gov/ https://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 mailto:support@grants.gov

BJA-2015-4115

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-2015-4115

Release date: March 9, 2015 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

National Sexual Assault Kit Initiative (SAKI)

(CFDA #16.833)

A. Program Description

Overview The National 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 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 for longer than 30 days, 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 the SAKI is the creation of a coordinated community response that ensures just resolution to these cases whenever possible through a victim-centered approach, as well as to build jurisdictions’ capacity to prevent the development of conditions that lead to high numbers of unsubmitted SAKs in the future. This holistic 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 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 supports the value of testing unsubmitted SAKs in solving sexual assault cases1. 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 cases2.3 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 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.

1 Comprehensive findings from these studies are forthcoming.

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.

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 encounter data sharing obstacles when exchanging information about Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) “hits” among police, prosecutors, and crime labs in a seamless and real time manner.

Funding under this solicitation is intended to help agencies address these challenges and reduce the number of unsubmitted SAKs in their jurisdiction, while achieving the long-term goal of improving the criminal justice response to cases of sexual assault.

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

Program-Specific Information SAKI is a competitive grant program that will provide funding to government entities within state, local, and tribal jurisdictions to inventory, track, and test previously unsubmitted SAKs (excluding SAKs that have already been submitted to the crime laboratory); produce necessary protocols and policies in support of improved coordination and collaboration among laboratories, police, prosecutors, and victim service providers in response to this emergent evidence and casework; resources to comprehensively address the sexual assault investigations and prosecutions that result from evidence and CODIS hits produced by tested SAKs; as well as to support and optimize victim notification protocols and services.

For purposes of this program the following are defined:

Sexual Assault Kit (SAK): A set of items used by medical personnel for the preservation of physical evidence collected from a person, living or deceased, following an allegation or suspicion of sexual assault.

Unsubmitted SAK: SAKs that have not been submitted to a forensic laboratory for testing and analysis.

Inventory: A detailed and descriptive list of articles or items (for purposes of this solicitation, SAKs) containing information such as, but not limited to: item identifiers, quantity, and location of the item.

Tracking: The monitoring and accounting of SAKs through the course, or path, of their movement from collection through final disposition.

Reporting: The task of delivering a written, detailed report to the appropriate entity within the prescribed time period and with the applicable data provided.

Based on the findings emerging from both the Detroit and Houston NIJ research projects and the recommendations of subject-matter experts (SMEs), BJA is implementing a national

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.

response model to address the issue of unsubmitted SAKs. The essential elements of a comprehensive model to address the issues that underlie the problem of unsubmitted SAKs are as follows (hereafter referred to as the BJA model):

1. The performance of an inventory of all unsubmitted SAKs in the jurisdiction’s possession

(excluding SAKs already submitted to the crime lab) regardless of where they are stored (police evidence facility, hospital, and other relevant locations) and the tracking of their progress from testing through final adjudication.

2. The creation of a regularly convened multidisciplinary working group for each site to address and identify the individual‐level, organizational‐level, and systemic factors that lead to high numbers of unsubmitted SAKs in the jurisdiction and development of a comprehensive strategy to address the issue. This working group should be comprised of law enforcement (including superior officers and officers that respond to and investigate sexual assault complaints), forensic medical personnel (including sexual assault forensic examiners), forensic laboratory personnel, prosecutors, and victim advocates (both system and community-based). [Some jurisdictions may already have Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTS) in place which could form the basis of the working group].

3. A designated “site coordinator” who will serve as the central point of contact for the site team. This individual will be responsible for fostering and coordinating communication among the team members and ensuring that the team is meeting its milestones.

To qualify for SAKI funding, applicants must propose to implement a comprehensive sexual assault response program plan that includes all three elements of the BJA model as outlined above.

Applicants will be required to track inventoried SAKs throughout the course of the award as part of their programmatic reporting requirements. Specifically, it will be expected that agencies will utilize an automated information technology system to track each SAK using an assigned unique identifier. The applicant must also identify the date upon which the state, tribe, or unit of local government would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations from prosecuting the offender.

A 2-day workshop for all grant recipient sites will take place in Washington, DC in FY 2016. All key site team personnel will be expected to attend. The workshop will focus on the elements of a successful project and key issues around DNA and unsubmitted SAK evidence.

Applicants must clearly delineate the amount of funding requested for SAK testing and associated review and certification activities. As this grant program is intended to assist jurisdictions in developing a comprehensive approach to the issue of unsubmitted SAKs and sexual assault case response, BJA does not anticipate funding projects that propose allocating more than 50 percent of their grant funds to SAK testing.

State or local crime laboratories can, and should, partner with the law enforcement agency or prosecutors’ office who serves as the lead applicant, but are not eligible to be lead applicants for this award since the BJA funding is intended for a comprehensive holistic approach. Crime labs seeking funding solely for DNA backlog elimination resources are encouraged to apply for the applicable grants managed by NIJ.

All DNA analyses conducted as a result of this program must be performed by a laboratory (government-owned or fee-for-service) that is accredited and currently undergoes external audits not less than once every 2 years. These audits must demonstrate that the laboratory maintains compliance with the DNA Quality Assurance Standards established by the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. All eligible DNA profiles obtained with funding under this program must be entered into CODIS and, where applicable, uploaded to the National DNA Index System (NDIS).

BJA suggests that no profiles generated during the testing portion of this program be entered into any non-governmental DNA database.

All DNA analyses conducted and profiles generated during the testing portion of this program must be maintained pursuant to all applicable federal privacy requirements, including those described in 42 U.S.C. § 14132(b)(3).

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables The goal of this grant program is to address the growing number of unsubmitted SAKs in law enforcement custody. There is broad consensus that this must be accomplished through an integrative approach to the problem. Grant funding may be used to inventory the existing numbers of unsubmitted SAKs, test these kits, and assign designated personnel to pursue new investigative leads and prosecutions and to support victims throughout the investigation and prosecution process. Grants may also be used to develop evidence-tracking systems, train law enforcement on sexual assault investigations, and conduct research on outcomes in sexual assault cases.

It is required that all grant recipients will utilize a comprehensive model to address the issues that underlie the problem of unsubmitted SAKs including:

The performance of an inventory of all unsubmitted SAKs in the jurisdictions as described above.

The creation of a regularly convened multidisciplinary working group as described above.

The objective of this working group is to enact systemic changes, programmatic activities, and deliverables that:

o Eliminate or reduce the existing number of unsubmitted SAKs through increased and strategic testing initiative, and effect changes in practice, protocol, and organizational culture necessary to prevent the issue from reoccurring in the future.

o Improve training, to include cross-disciplinary training among group members to ensure all participants/disciplines are prepared to respond to the evidence emerging from unsubmitted SAKs in a victim-centered manner and improve the quality of response to future reports of sexual assault. Such training should include instruction on the probative value of forensic evidence typically contained in SAKs, including its utility in developing investigatory leads, identifying suspects, and increasing the likelihood of successful prosecution of the case.

o Establish evidence-based, victim-centered protocols and policies that address SAK evidence collection, testing, and tracking and victim engagement, notification, and support.

o Identify and allocate resources (laboratory review, investigatory, prosecutorial, and advocacy) required to produce and follow up on all valid evidence resulting from the testing process.

o Establish or implement processes that prioritize the investigation and adjudication of the SAKI cases.

o Establish evidence tracking, case management, and victim notification mechanisms that enhance accountability, transparency, and information sharing among different system actors as well as victims’ access to their case status. These systems must enhance the jurisdiction’s ability to manage and monitor the progress of kits through the evidence collection and testing process, provide enhanced case management capabilities that assist in case assignment, tiered supervisory review, and electronic case tracking through disposition of cases associated with kits and provide victims with access to information about their cases.

o Leverage the data gathered from the comprehensive testing process to improve the understanding of the nature and extent of the sexual assault problem in the community, and inform the creation of policy and programmatic interventions needed to respond.

o Strengthen advocacy resources, within the police agency and/or the community based advocacy organizations. This may include the creation of an advocate position within the police agency dedicated to victim engagement and notification who can work with investigators as they pursue leads associated with evidence from previously unsubmitted SAKs. It would also include enhancing the crisis center’s capacity to serve an increased number of victims with the unique advocacy and justice needs that arise when previously unsubmitted SAKs are tested.

o Identify a designated “site coordinator” who will serve as the central point of contact for the site team. This individual will be responsible for fostering and coordinating communication among the team members and ensuring that the team is meeting its milestones. Additionally, this person must work on a regular basis with the BJA training and technical assistance (TTA) provider assigned to the site. (BJA will also be awarding funding for the SAKI National TTA Program, which will provide direct assistance to jurisdictions that receive funding through the SAKI program and provide targeted TTA in support of their initiatives as well as other jurisdictions engaged in reform efforts as resources allow).

Applicants may request funds to support the outlined deliverables/in support of the following project activities:

Performing a comprehensive inventory of unsubmitted SAKs and establishment of the necessary policies and protocols to establish an all-inclusive SAK testing strategy.

Testing of SAKs, to include outsourcing kits for testing and technical review of data/results, as well as tracking and reporting of performance metrics.

Identifying the 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 determine solutions to promote greater efficiency.

Providing additional assistance (not including laboratory equipment) that should include support for public labs’ implementation of sustainable automated and streamlined SAK processing procedures to ensure long-term capacity and efficiency.

Establishing a regularly convened multidisciplinary working group to identify the individual‐ level, organizational‐level, and systemic factors that lead to high numbers of unsubmitted SAKs in the jurisdiction. Development of a comprehensive strategy to address the issue and to implement the elements of the comprehensive model for sexual assault response reform.

Supporting personnel costs, including hiring and overtime, to allow adequate follow up for investigations and prosecutions that result from evidence related to testing SAKs. This may include the establishment of cold case or sexual assault investigation units, and the hiring of specialized victim advocates to engage in victim-centered notification, communication, and support activities.

Purchasing of SAK/evidence tracking systems, case management systems, or other technology (not including laboratory equipment) to enhance investigation/prosecution capacity in relation to these cases as part of a holistic approach, and training on the new systems.

Training in relation to sexual assault evidence collection, DNA technology, victimization and trauma response, and other related topics to improve the quality and outcomes of sexual assault investigations and prosecutions.

Developing evidence collection, retention, victim notification, and other protocols needed to optimize data sharing, case investigation, prosecution, and victim support.

Enhancing victim services and support for past and current victims of sexual assault, as well as the provision of mechanisms through which victims can easily access updated information about the status of their SAK or associated investigation and/or prosecution.

Addressing the issue of expiration of statute of limitations on SAKs in their custody; testing protocols; investigation practices; and policies and procedures related to previously closed cases that are subsequently reopened as a result of new evidence obtained through the SAK testing process.

To qualify for SAKI funding, applicants must propose to implement a comprehensive sexual assault response reform program plan that includes all three elements of the BJA model: 1.

Inventory, 2. Creation of a Multidisciplinary Working Group, and 3. Designated Site Coordinator). Funds may be requested to support the three major elements if required, or, for specific and discrete elements as determined by the needs of the applicant’s jurisdiction.

However, regardless of the proposed use of funds, applicants must describe how their project will include all three of the BJA model’s elements in their program plan.

If an unsubmitted SAK inventory has already been completed by the applicant jurisdiction, the applicant must provide information regarding the results of their inventory in their proposal and request funding support for the tracking, multidisciplinary team and the site coordinator as necessary. If applicants have already completed an inventory of existing unsubmitted SAKs, certification of this inventory will be required prior to the release of additional funds. This certification requirement may be met through the inclusion of a certification letter signed by the applicant’s chief executive officer. The certification letter should detail the results of the inventory and be included as an attachment with the application.

Award recipients must, on a monthly basis, report the number of SAKs reviewed and catalogued by working group members, including local, state, federal, and tribal law enforcement partners to BJA. It is expected that the inventory will be completed within the first 6 months of the grant being awarded. SAKI grantees will also be encouraged to make their aggregate inventory and tracking data available to the public to increase the transparency of their SAK testing and disposition processes.

Certification of having completed an inventory must be provided, and mechanisms for meeting the reporting requirements clearly established, before funding is released for the remainder of the project activities.

The SAK working group must attempt to identify what contributed to, and continues to drive, the volume of unsubmitted SAKs, and work with all relevant entities to develop and implement new policies and procedures to combat the issues.

SAKI grant recipients will be expected to identify and maintain consistent, experienced, and committed leadership of their sexual assault response reform initiative, and do so through the appointment of a dedicated site coordinator in accordance with the aforementioned model. To produce the deliverables outlined in the model, the SAKI working group must meet regularly and include representatives of all essential agencies, organizations, and individuals necessary to effect the reforms necessary to improve system response to sexual assault. Successful applicants will provide for adequate administrative support for the working group. In addition to those outlined in the model, the working group activities and deliverables will also include:

Development of methods and processes for the collection, analysis and sharing of critical programmatic data.

Assessment of stakeholder training needs and provision of training as appropriate.

Monitoring progress made in follow up investigators and prosecutions, when warranted.

Close coordination and collaboration with BJA’s national TTA provider.

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 http://www.crimesolutions.gov/ resource that applicants may use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services.

B. Federal Award Information

BJA estimates that it will make up to 12 awards of up to $2 million for an estimated total of $24 million for a 3-year project period, beginning on October 1, 2015. As stated above, BJA does not anticipate funding projects that propose allocating more than 50 percent of their grant funds to SAK testing. However, BJA’s TTA provider will work with grant recipients to attempt to secure additional non-BJA funding for the SAK testing component, if needed.

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 Award5 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.

5 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)).

(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 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.6 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.

6 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

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 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.

http://www.ojp.gov/financialguide/PostawardRequirements/chapter15page1.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm

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 has designated the following application elements as critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, Budget Narrative, certification of and findings resulting from a completed unsubmitted SAK inventory, if applicable, and Letters of Commitment.

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.

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

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.

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. Performance measures for this solicitation are as follows:

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides

Reduce the number of unsubmitted sexual assault kits (SAKs) by implementing a comprehensive, multidisciplinary plan to inventory, test, and track unsubmitted SAKs through to final adjudication

Number of SAKs inventoried

Number of unsubmitted SAKs identified

Number of previously tested SAKs

Number of SAKs not requiring testing (e.g., those pertaining to previously adjudicated cases)

Percentage of unsubmitted SAKS identified needing forensic DNA testing

During the reporting period:

A. Number of SAKs inventoried

B. Of the number of SAKs inventoried, how many were:

1) Identified as unsubmitted

SAKs

2) Identified as previously tested

SAKs

3) Determined not to require testing

a) if determined to not require testing, why?

Percentage of unsubmitted SAKs tested for DNA

Percent reduction in the number of unsubmitted SAKs requiring DNA testing

Percent increase in the number of unsubmitted SAKs sent to a lab for DNA testing

Percent of DNA profiles from SAK testing resulting in a CODIS match

Percentage of DNA profiles resulting from SAK DNA testing entered into CODIS

A. Out of the unsubmitted SAKs, how many were:

1) determined to need forensic

DNA Testing

2) sent out for DNA testing

A. Number of DNA profiles from forensic analyses entered into CODIS from SAKs submitted for testing

B. Number of CODIS hits attributable to SAK submitted for testing

Establish a multidisciplinary working group to identify the underlying factors that contribute to unsubmitted SAKs and devise a comprehensive plan to inventory, track, an maintain accountability for SAKs

Percentage of project plan outcomes met

Number of agencies/organizations participating on the SAK initiative working group

Percent of agencies/organizations stakeholders who commit member participation formally through a Memorandum of Understanding

Percent of other agencies/organizations stakeholders (not on the working group) who commit participation formally through a Memorandum of Understanding

A. Number of project tasks to include but not limited:

Establishment of a regularly convening multidisciplinary working group

Appointment of a dedicated site coordinator

Assessment of stakeholder training needs

B. Number of project tasks completed

A. Number of agencies/organizations represented on the SAK initiative working group

B. Number of agencies/organizations who commit their SAK initiative working group participation formally through a Memorandum of Understanding

C. Types of personnel participating on the SAK working group, including but not limited to

1. Law Enforcement Superior

Officers

2. Investigative Officers

3. Sexual Assault Forensic

Examiners

4. Forensic Laboratory

5. Prosecutors

6. Victim Advocates

A. Number of other (not on the working group) stakeholder agencies/organizations participating in the SAK initiative

B. Number of formal agreements/partnerships established with other (not on the working group) stakeholder

Number of new policies, procedures, strategies, or interventions developed to maintain accountability of SAKs

Number of new staff positions created agencies/organizations participating in the SAK initiative

A. List the main factors contributing to unsubmitted SAKs

B. Of those contributing factors, how many new policies and procedures designed to eliminate causative agents

Number and type of new positions created

Improve the investigation and prosecution of SAK cases through the adoption of improved protocols, technology, and management systems

Number of deliverables that meet expectations

Number of deliverables that meet expectations, where applicable to include:

implementation of a new electronic tracking system training in relation to sexual assault evidence collection, DNA technology, victimization and trauma response, other related topics

Develop victim notification protocols and evaluate efficacy to enhance victim services and support victims of sexual assault

Percent of victims contacted as a result of the SAKI

Percent of victims that agreed to actively participate in a new investigation resulting from the SAKI

Number of victim notification resources

Increase the number of victim advocate partners

Number of prosecuted cases resulting from previously untested kits

During the reporting period:

Number of victims identified as a result of the SAKI

Number of victims contacted by an investigator as a result of the SAKI

Number of contacted victims that agreed to actively participate in a new investigation resulting from the SAKI

Number of resources developed for victims and providers (e.g. FAQ brochure and a packet of community resources)

Number of victim advocate partners participating in the SAKI

Number of prosecuted cases

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.

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 The budget narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category of expense listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet.