15smartdefensesol.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 under the Smart Defense Initiative, a grant program designed to improve pubic defense delivery systems at the state and local level. This program furthers the Department’s mission by ensuring the fair administration of justice.

Smart Defense Initiative Answering Gideon’s Call:

Improving Public Defense Delivery Systems FY 2015 Competitive Grant Announcement

Eligibility Eligible applicants are state or local government agencies, independent boards or commissions, state or local public defender organizations, and other organizations, including nonprofit organizations (including tribal nonprofit organizations).

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 April 22, 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 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 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 http://www.grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp

BJA-2015-4080

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-2015-4080

Release date: February 23, 2015 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

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

Smart Defense Initiative Answering Gideon’s Call:

Improving Public Defense Delivery Systems

(CFDA #16.817)

A. Program Description

Overview The Smart Defense Initiative, administered by BJA, is part of BJA’s “Smart Suite” of criminal justice programs including Smart Pretrial, Smart Policing, Smart Supervision, and Smart Prosecution. BJA established the Smart Suite over 5 years ago with the creation of the Smart Policing Initiative. The Smart Suite supports criminal justice professionals in building evidence-based, data-driven criminal justice strategies that are effective, efficient, and economical. BJA’s smart programs represent a strategic approach that brings more “science” into criminal justice operations by leveraging innovative applications of analysis, technology, and evidence-based practices.

In many states, the public defense delivery system is in crisis, with too many defendants lacking access to quality advice and representation. In addition to being a matter of constitutional concern, this void can contribute to over-incarceration, reduced confidence in the justice system, and other inequities. Without quality effective representation, a defendant may not be treated fairly, may not understand the process, and may not get the benefit of available alternatives to incarceration for first-time or low-level offenses. Additionally, if these issues are not addressed, victims are ill-served and the criminal justice system’s shared goals of justice and public safety go unmet.

To help jurisdictions strengthen state and local public defense delivery systems, BJA is releasing this competitive grant announcement. Under Smart Defense, BJA is seeking applicants who are interested in developing innovative, data-driven approaches to improve their public defense delivery systems guided by the Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System. This program is funded under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (Pub. L. No.

113-76).

Program-Specific Information DOJ has long recognized the importance of quality public defense to a fair justice system.

Today, despite the decades that have gone by since the landmark decision in Gideon v.

Wainwright, and the important decisions that have followed recognizing the right to counsel in juvenile and misdemeanor cases, Gideon has yet to be fully realized.

The purpose of this program is to improve the quality of public defense delivery systems guided by the Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System, promulgated by the American Bar Association (ABA) in 2002. The ABA Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System (the ABA Ten Principles) represent fundamental building blocks for implementing quality legal representation for indigent criminal defendants. Released in 2002, the ABA Ten Principles list the American Bar Association’s recommendations for government officials and other parties who are charged with improving public defense delivery systems. These principles address defenders’ appropriate function, workload, resources, training, and quality, and have been http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_aid_indigent_defendants/ls_sclaid_def_tenprinciplesbooklet.authcheckdam.pdf http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_aid_indigent_defendants/ls_sclaid_def_tenprinciplesbooklet.authcheckdam.pdf http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/legal_aid_indigent_defendants/ls_sclaid_def_tenprinciplesbooklet.authcheckdam.pdf recognized by the Attorney General “as [an] essential guidepost for ensuring that our indigent defense efforts are as effective- and as efficient – as possible.”

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables The goal of this initiative is to ensure that no person faces the loss of liberty without first having the aid of a lawyer with the time, ability, and resources to present an effective defense. The objectives are to enhance a state or local jurisdiction’s ability to provide quality representation to indigent defendants, promote innovation and promote innovative strategies that incorporate the ABA Ten Principles. Smart Defense applications require a research partner/organization as part of the application. This means applicants must enlist a research partner/ organization with criminal justice experience to assist in data analysis and problem identification, description, and definition; participate in strategy development; and provide ongoing assessment of the strategy and program impact.

BJA is soliciting applications that:

Describe the innovative, data-driven approach to be implemented.

Enlist a local research partner from the accredited criminal justice/social science community to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach.

Identify gaps to be addressed by one or more of the four ABA Ten Principles listed directly below.*

Develop a program design that outlines strategies, using a thoughtful and through analytical approach, to overcome the problem and/or situation to be addressed.

Develop performance measures for the initiative.

Assess and report the results to BJA, who will make the results publicly available.

*BJA is soliciting applicants to address one or more of the following ABA Ten Principles:

Independence—Principle One: The public defense function, including the selection, funding and payment of defense counsel, is independent.

Authority to set standards (e.g., caseloads) and no retribution for enforcing them—Principle Five: Defense counsel's workload is controlled to permit the rendering of quality representation.

Early entry—Principle Three: Clients are screened for eligibility, and defense counsel is assigned and notified of appointment, as soon as feasible after clients' arrest detention, or request for counsel.

Supervision and evaluation—Principle Ten: Defense counsel is supervised and systematically reviewed for quality and efficiency according to nationally and locally adopted standards.

Examples of allowable activities/deliverables include, but are not limited to:

1. Establishment of independent board responsible for assigning, oversight, and financing public defense delivery systems;

2. Creation of a process to ensure that only highly qualified lawyers are approved for the public defense rosters, which includes process to remove unqualified lawyers;

3. Creation/implementation and oversight of model contracts for assigned counsel;

4. Adoption or creation of written income eligibility guidelines that includes well-designed screening;

5. Creation of supervision programs that continuously monitors the workloads of lawyers;

6. Adoption of a process that matches cases to attorneys based upon attorney experience and training, and case complexity and severity;

7. Creation of robust supervision and review process for public defense providers;

8. Development of a data driven communication strategy to inform policy decisions; and

9. Development and implementation of case management systems for public defense delivery systems.

To help achieve these important outcomes, Smart Defense grantees will work closely with BJA and its training and technical assistance (TTA) partner, who is being solicited under a different FY 2015 competitive grant announcement, to assist agencies incorporate innovative and/or evidence-based defense strategies and principles as a fundamental element in ensuring the fair administration of justice. The TTA partner will work directly with BJA in hosting grantee meetings, facilitating peer-to-peer exchanges of information, administering targeted subject matter expertise that is relevant to specific Smart Defense sites and producing reports on the lessons learned from the Smart Defense community.

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.

B. Federal Award Information

Depending on availability of funds, BJA estimates that it will make up to five awards of up to $400,000 each for a 24-month 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 http://www.crimesolutions.gov/ 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 Award1 BJA expects that it will make any award from this solicitation in the form of a grant.

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 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 Applicants should budget travel and lodging expenses for a four-person team, including a research partner to attend two 2-day meetings during the 24-month period. The meetings may be held in the Washington, D.C. area or other like regions of the country.

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

1 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)).

http://gfm.webfirst.com/ 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.2 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 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.

2 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://ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/15Tables/exec/html/ES.aspx http://www.ojp.gov/financialguide/PostawardRequirements/chapter15page1.htm

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 has designated the following application elements as 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.

http://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm

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.

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.

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

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, which are part of the Selection Criteria, 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

Identify and address a new solution that is consistent with the ABA Ten Principles of a Public Defense Delivery System

Percent of program goals and objectives completed that are directly linked to grant funding and address one of the Ten Principles

Number of new solutions employed

Number of evidence-based practices deployed

Number of program tasks that were completed during the reporting period that are directly linked to grant funding (Task: a grant activity defined in application project plan)

Number of total program tasks (complete or incomplete) that are directly linked to grant funding

Number of new solutions employed during the current reporting period

Number of evidence-based practices deployed over the life of the grant

Enhance public defender knowledge of effective public defense delivery system strategies for ensuring the fair administration of justice

Number of engagements with the TTA partner

During the reporting period, the number TTA engagements:

A. Telephonic Technical

Assistance B. Onsite Visits/Technical

Assistance C. In-Person Training Sessions D. Web-based Training Sessions

Support and sustain evidence-based public defense delivery system strategies consistent with the ABA Ten Principles of a Defense Delivery System

Number of new written policies implemented [Principle 1]

Number of new policies implemented pertaining to Principle 1, to include policies governing:

Nonpartisan board oversee defender, assigned counsel, or contract system

Percent of clients found eligible for legal services [Principle 3]

Percent of eligible indigent defense cases assigned an attorney [Principle 3]

Average wait time (in days) between eligible client’s detention or request for counsel and the appointment of counsel [Principle 3]

Average caseload per public defender [Principle 5]

Percent of cases systematically reviewed according to appropriate local or national standards for quality and efficient defense counsel [Principle 10]

Number of research partner engagements

Merit-based selection of chief defender and staff

Promote diversity in the recruitment of attorney staff

During the reporting period, total number of clients screened for eligibility

During the reporting period, total number of clients found eligible

Number of eligible indigent defense cases

Number of eligible indigent defense cases assigned an attorney

Of the total number of clients found eligible, Total number of days lapsed between eligible clients detention or request for counsel and the appointment of counsel

During the reporting period, total number of new and ongoing defense cases that originate out of the office with the grant

During the reporting period, total number of public defenders with an active caseload within the office with the grant

During the reporting period, total number of cases

During the reporting period, total number of cases systematically reviewed to assess the quality and efficiency of defense counsel

During the reporting period, number of times staff engaged in the initiative met with the research partner

Please describe the activities that the research partner is conducting

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.

e. Sustainability

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.

Applicants should budget travel and lodging expenses for a four-person team, including a research partner to attend two 2-day meetings during the 24-month period. The meetings may be held in the Washington, D.C. area or other like regions of the country.

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. 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 http://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/Explore/SolicitationRequirements/EvidenceResearchEvaluationRequirements.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/Explore/SolicitationRequirements/EvidenceResearchEvaluationRequirements.htm http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf http://www.ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm 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 approved indirect cost rate. (This requirement does not apply to units of local government.) Attach a copy of the federally approved indirect cost rate agreement to the application. Applicants that do not have an approved rate may request one through their cognizant federal agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant organization, or, if the applicant’s accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost categories.

For the definition of Cognizant Federal Agency, see the “Glossary of Terms” in the Financial Guide. For assistance with identifying your cognizant agency, please contact the Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, applicants may obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal at www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf.

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) Tribes, tribal organizations, or third parties proposing to provide direct services or assistance to residents on tribal lands should include in their applications a resolution, a letter, affidavit, or other documentation, as appropriate, that certifies that the applicant has the legal authority from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed project on tribal lands. In those instances when an organization or consortium of tribes applies for a grant on behalf of a tribe or multiple specific tribes, the application should include appropriate legal documentation, as described above, from all tribes that would receive services or assistance under the grant. A consortium of tribes for which existing consortium bylaws allow action without support from all tribes in the consortium (i.e., without an authorizing resolution or comparable legal documentation from each tribal governing body) may submit, instead, a copy of its consortium bylaws with the application.

7. Applicant Disclosure of High Risk Status Applicants are to disclose whether they are currently designated high risk by another federal grant making agency. This includes any status requiring additional oversight by the federal http://ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm http://ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm http://ojp.gov/financialguide/index.htm mailto:ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov http://www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf

SAMPLE

agency due to past programmatic or financial concerns. If an applicant is designated high risk by another federal grant making agency, you must email the following information to OJPComplianceReporting@usdoj.gov at the time of application submission:

The federal agency that currently designated the applicant as high risk

Date the applicant was designated high risk

The high risk point of contact name, phone number, and email address, from that federal agency

Reasons for the high risk status

OJP seeks this information to ensure appropriate federal oversight of any grant award.

Unlike the Excluded Parties List, this high risk information does not disqualify any organization from receiving an OJP award. However, additional grant oversight may be included, if necessary, in award documentation.

8. Additional Attachments

a. Timeline

Include a comprehensive timeline that identifies milestones, numerically listed deliverables, and who is responsible for each activity (provide title and agency).

b. Position Descriptions and Resumes Include position descriptions and resumes for key project personnel, if known.

c. Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications Applicants are to disclose whether they have pending applications for federally funded grants or subgrants (including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed under this solicitation and will cover the identical cost items outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the application under this solicitation. The disclosure should include both direct applications for federal funding (e.g., applications to federal agencies) and indirect applications for such funding (e.g., applications to State agencies that will subaward federal funds).

OJP seeks this information to help avoid any inappropriate duplication of funding.

Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement comprehensive programs or projects is encouraged and is not seen as inappropriate duplication.

Applicants that have pending applications as described above are to provide the following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 months:

The federal or state funding agency

The solicitation name/project name

The point of contact information at the applicable funding agency

Federal or State Funding Agency

Solicitation Name/Project Name

Name/Phone/E-mail for Point of Contact at Funding Agency

DOJ/COPS COPS Hiring Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; jane.doe@usdoj.gov mailto:OJPComplianceReporting@usdoj.gov mailto:jane.doe@usdoj.gov

Applicants should include the table as a separate attachment, with the file name “Disclosure of Pending Applications,” to their application. Applicants that do not have pending applications as described above are to include a statement to this effect in the separate attachment page (e.g., “[Applicant Name on SF-424] does not have pending applications submitted within the last 12 months for federally funded grants or subgrants (including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed under this solicitation and will cover the identical cost items outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the application under this solicitation.”).

d. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity If a proposal involves research and/or evaluation, regardless of the proposal’s other merits, in order to receive funds, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence, including appropriate safeguards to ensure research/evaluation objectivity and integrity, both in this proposal and as it may relate to the applicant’s other current or prior related projects. This documentation may be included as an attachment to the application which addresses BOTH i. and ii. below.

i. For purposes of this solicitation, applicants must document research and evaluation independence and integrity by including, at a minimum, one of the following two items:

a. A specific assurance that the applicant has reviewed its proposal to identify any research integrity issues (including all principal investigators and sub-recipients) and it has concluded that the design, conduct, or reporting of research and evaluation funded by BJA grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts will not be biased by any personal or financial conflict of interest on the part of part of its staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients responsible for the research and evaluation or on the part of the applicant organization;

OR

b. A specific listing of actual or perceived conflicts of interest that the applicant has identified in relation to this proposal. These conflicts could be either personal (related to specific staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients) or organizational (related to the applicant or any subgrantee organization). Examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations may include, but are not limited to, those in which an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a spouse’s work product (actual conflict), or an investigator would be in a position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague (potential apparent conflict).

With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, as one example, generally an organization could not be given a grant to evaluate a project if that organization had itself provided substantial prior technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the project (whether funded by OJP or other sources), as the organization in such an instance would appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own prior work. The key is whether a

HHS/ Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration

Drug Free Communities Mentoring Program/ North County Youth Mentoring Program

John Doe, 202/000-0000; john.doe@hhs.gov mailto:john.doe@hhs.gov reasonable person understanding all of the facts would be able to have confidence that the results of any research or evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or research product is a problem and must be disclosed.

ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation applicants must address the issue of possible mitigation of research integrity concerns by including, at a minimum, one of the following two items:

a. If an applicant reasonably believes that no potential personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist, then the applicant should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it reached that conclusion. Applicants MUST also include an explanation of the specific processes and procedures that the applicant will put in place to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) potential personal or financial conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients for this particular project, should that be necessary during the grant period. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard could include organizational codes of ethics/conduct or policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest.

OR

b. If the applicant has identified specific personal or organizational conflicts of interest in its proposal during this review, the applicant must propose a specific and robust mitigation plan to address conflicts noted above. At a minimum, the plan must include specific processes and procedures that the applicant will put in place to eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) potential personal or financial conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients for this particular project, should that be necessary during the grant period.

Documentation that may be helpful in this regard could include organizational codes of ethics/conduct or policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed.

Considerations in assessing research and evaluation independence and integrity will include, but are not be limited to, the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify factors that could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the organization in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation activity; and the adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed remedies to control any such factors.

9. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire In accordance with 2 CFR 200.205, Federal agencies must have in place a framework for evaluating the risks posed by applicants before they receive a Federal award. To facilitate part of this risk evaluation, all applicants (other than an individual) are to download, complete, and submit this form.

10. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

All applicants must complete this information. Applicants that expend any funds for lobbying activities are to provide the detailed information requested on the form Disclosure of http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=2ebfb13012953333f32ed4cf1411e33e&node=pt2.1.200&rgn=div5#se2.1.200_1205 http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/FinancialCapability.pdf

Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). Applicants that do not expend any funds for lobbying activities are to enter “N/A” in the text boxes for item 10 (“a. Name and Address of Lobbying Registrant” and “b. Individuals Performing Services”).

How to Apply Applicants must register in, and submit applications through Grants.gov, a “one-stop storefront” to find federal funding opportunities and apply for funding. Find complete instructions on how to register and submit an application at www.Grants.gov. Applicants that experience technical difficulties during this process should call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800-518- 4726 or 606–545–5035, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except federal holidays. Registering with Grants.gov is a one-time process; however, processing delays may occur, and it can take several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. OJP encourages applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline.

In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications 72 hours prior to the application due date to allow time to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

BJA strongly encourages all prospective applicants to sign up for Grants.gov email notifications regarding this solicitation. If this solicitation is cancelled or modified, individuals who sign up with Grants.gov for updates will be automatically notified.

Note on File Names and File Types: Grants.gov only permits the use of certain specific characters in names of attachment files. Valid file names may include only the characters shown in the table below. Grants.gov is designed to reject any application that includes an attachment(s) with a file name that contains any characters not shown in the table below.

Characters Special Characters

Upper case (A – Z) Parenthesis ( ) Curly braces { } Square brackets [ ]

Lower case (a – z) Ampersand (&) Tilde (~) Exclamation point (!)

Underscore (__) Comma ( , ) Semicolon ( ; ) Apostrophe ( ‘ )

Hyphen ( - ) At sign (@) Number sign (#) Dollar sign ($)

Space Percent sign (%) Plus sign (+) Equal sign (=)

Period (.) When using the ampersand (&) in XML, applicants must use the “&” format.

Grants.gov is designed to forward successfully submitted applications to OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS).

GMS does not accept executable file types as application attachments. These disallowed file types include, but are not limited to, the following extensions: “.com,” “.bat,” “.exe,” “.vbs,” “.cfg,” “.dat,” “.db,” “.dbf,” “.dll,” “.ini,” “.log,” “.ora,” “.sys,” and “.zip.” GMS may reject applications with files that use these extensions. It is important to allow time to change the type of file(s) if the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps:

OJP may…