fy 2013 sadip nofa - as posted.pdf

United States Department of Transportation

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Fiscal Year 2013 – Safety Data Improvement Program Grants Notice of Funding Availability

The United States Department of Transportation’s (US DOT) Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announces the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 Safety Data Improvement Program (SaDIP) grant funding opportunity. This document will assist you by providing important information about the SaDIP program, including the FY 2013 program priorities and critical information related to preparing and submitting a grant application. All applications must be submitted through Grants.gov by 11:59 P.M. (Eastern Time) on November 13, 2012.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for SaDIP is 20.234.

Important Changes and Reminders for FY 2013:

All Applicants, even Applicants that have received previous funding, should read this entire Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). This NOFA establishes minimum requirements for FY 2013 submissions, which have changed from previous years.

Please review the entire document before submitting an application.

All FY 2013 SaDIP applications must be submitted in response to this NOFA; FMCSA does not anticipate a second NOFA for FY 2013 SaDIP.

There are required elements that all Applicants must address in the application. A suggested outline is located in Appendix A – Guidance for Designing Performance-based Projects, which includes a Project Narrative and a Budget Narrative (also see Appendix B – Guidance for Developing an Object Class Budget), Appendix C – Key Contacts Form Instructions, and Appendix D – FMCSA Financial Assistance Agreement General Provisions and Assurances (subject to revision).

Applications for SaDIP funding must address the FMCSA State Data Quality (SSDQ) map which reflects the quality of State crash and inspection data (see Section I).

The FMCSA will not evaluate applications received without the complete set of required forms and attachments; all application section elements and all documents must be submitted (see Section IV).

Application review information is clarified to include expectations and evaluation criteria (see Section V).

All Applicants must submit a current FMCSA Administrative Capability Questionnaire.

(An Applicant need only prepare and certify one questionnaire for all FY 2013 applications, but it must be included in each grant application.)

The FMCSA will provide reimbursement for no more that 80 percent of all eligible costs and recipients are required to provide a 20 percent match.

Grantees must agree to comply with the FMCSA Financial Assistance Agreement General Provisions and Assurances throughout the grant period of performance in order to execute the grant agreement and before grant funds are awarded (see Section VI).

The Central Contractor Registration (CCR) system, along with Federal Agency Registration (FedReg), the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), and the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS) migrated to the new System for Award Management (SAM) at the end of July 2012. For further information please see https://www.sam.gov/sam/ or https://www.bpn.gov/ccr.

Section I: Funding Opportunity Description

The FMCSA announces the availability of SaDIP funding as authorized by section 4128 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) ), as amended by Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP- 21), Pub. L. No.112–141, §§ 32603(c) (2012). As described in 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) section 31100, discretionary funding is available for States involved in the collection, analysis, and reporting of large truck and bus crash and inspection data to improve the quality of the commercial motor vehicle (CMV) data reported by States to FMCSA.

Specifically, applications are sought that will improve the timeliness, efficiency, accuracy, and completeness of State processes and systems.

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 31100, eligible awardees for SaDIP funding include States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The FMCSA provides SaDIP funds to improve the quality of truck and bus crash and inspection data reported to FMCSA by States.

Applicants for SaDIP funding are encouraged to address the FMCSA State Data Quality (SSDQ) map (available at http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/DataQuality/dataquality.asp), which reflects the quality of State crash and inspection data as measured by the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the large truck and bus crash and inspection data reported to FMCSA.

Ratings are updated monthly and individual State performance is portrayed through a color-coded rating system based on overall performance: Green (good performance), Yellow (fair performance), and Red (poor performance). Priority will be given to proposals received from States rated Yellow and Red on the SSDQ Map and that address a specific deficiency in the State’s ability to report high-quality data. States may also submit applications that are more general in nature and that propose innovative strategies to improve statewide CMV data collection processes and systems.

SaDIP grant applications cannot duplicate State applications for Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) High Priority funding. However, States may apply for SaDIP funds to support data quality projects that complement other data quality projects funded in part by MCSAP Basic/Incentive or High Priority grant funding.

States should submit only one (1) SaDIP grant application per announcement. A single organization within any State may not have all of the required data capabilities to support the SSDQ program in the State. This grant program may require collaboration among the data owners, data collectors, and data processors to achieve the program objectives. It is envisioned that the Grantee agency may need to actively involve several parties in the development of the formal application. Therefore, FMCSA encourages a State-level agency to submit applications for project plans requiring collaboration between State and local highway safety and law enforcement community stakeholders.

Applicants should also notify their FMCSA State Division Administrator (DA) of their intention to prepare an application for FY 2013 SaDIP grant funds.

Program Goals – FY 2013 National Priorities

National priorities for the SaDIP program include:

Priority I: FMCSA will give top priority to proposals received from States rated Red and Yellow on the SSDQ Map and that address a specific deficiency in the State’s ability to assure the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of CMV data reported to

SAFETYNET.

Priority II: Then, FMCSA will give priority to proposals received from States who describe projects that exhibit the greatest potential to improve the overall composition of the SSDQ Map.

Priority III: Finally, FMCSA will consider proposals received from States that address specific deficiencies in the State’s ability to address DataQs system requests for data review and improve the overall quality of crash and inspection data reported by the States to FMCSA.

Section II: Award Information

Available Funding

i. For FY 2013, FMCSA anticipates awarding a total of $3,000,000 in SaDIP funding.

There is no mandatory floor or ceiling for these awards, which typically range in size from $100,000 to $500,000.

ii. The Federal share of all funds awarded under the SaDIP grant program is up to 80 percent (80%) of the total project cost; a 20 percent (20%) match is required. Matching funds can either be cash or in-kind contributions. In-kind contributions must be included in the approved budget and must be verifiable from the Grantee’s records. The contributions must not be drawn from another Federal grant award or the matching funds required for that award. Refer to 49 CFR §18.24 for more information related to acceptable matching and cost sharing.

iii. Applicants may not receive the full amount requested. If an Applicant accepts a grant awarded under this program, it is responsible for all project expenses that exceed the awarded amount. The FMCSA may contact the Applicant directly if the award amount is expected to be less than the amount requested to ensure that the project will remain sustainable with less than the amount requested.

iv. The FMCSA expects to announce awards as soon as administratively practicable

(subject to availability of funds).

Cost Requirements

Costs charged to FMCSA grants must be in accordance with the applicable cost principles for the Grantee type. All reimbursable items must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable to accomplish the goals of the program. These standards are described in the applicable cost principles and administrative requirements:

49 CFR Part 18; and 2 CFR Part 225 (Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments, OMB Circular A-87).

The eligibility of specific items is subject to review by FMCSA. For assistance during the pre-application phase, Applicants may contact the FMCSA Grant Program Manager listed in Section VII of this NOFA or their local FMCSA Division Office for guidance on the cost eligibility of activities or items.

Expenses eligible for reimbursement under the SaDIP program include, but are not limited to:

1. Personnel expenses, including recruitment and screening, training, salaries and fringe benefits, and supervision, including staff to code and enter CMV safety performance data.

2. Equipment and travel expenses, including per diem.

3. Indirect expenses for facilities, except for fixed scales, used to conduct inspections or house enforcement personnel, support staff, and equipment to the extent they are measurable and recurring (e.g., rent and overhead). NOTE: Any application containing indirect costs in its proposed project budget must be accompanied by either the signed current indirect cost rate negotiated agreement approved by the cognizant Federal agency or a copy of the request for such rate. If indirect costs are not included in the project’s proposed budget, no indirect cost rate agreement is required.

4. Expenses related to data acquisition, storage, and analysis that are specifically identifiable as program-related to develop a database to coordinate resources and improve efficiency, including developing software to transfer data from the State repository to SAFETYNET and purchasing software for field data collection and data transfer.

5. Clerical and administrative expenses, to the extent necessary and directly attributable to SSDQ activities.

SaDIP funding may also be used for revising outdated crash report forms; data quality initiatives designed to support the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) intervention strategies; and projects designed to improve the overall quality of the FMCSA Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) census data.

Section III: Eligibility Information

Eligible applicants include States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S.

Virgin Islands.

Individuals and businesses are not eligible to receive SaDIP funding.

Pursuant to the eligibility requirements stipulated in Section 4128 of SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1715, 1742 (2005), Applicants shall be eligible for a grant under this section in a fiscal year if the Secretary determines that the Applicant has:

1. Conducted a comprehensive audit of its CMV safety data system within the preceding 2 years; and

2. Developed a plan that identifies and prioritizes its CMV safety data needs and goals; and

3. Identified performance-based measures to determine progress toward those goals.

Applicants must describe in their proposal how they have completed each of the three eligibility requirements above. The application must explain the specific nature and scope of the audit/review of the CMV safety data system performed by the State in the preceding 2 years.

An audit of the Applicant’s CMV safety data and system performed by the Applicant should include the close examination and evaluation of recommendations resulting from an audit/review conducted by FMCSA (if applicable). Further, this audit may include, but is not limited to, evaluation of the State Safety Data Quality (SSDQ) program monthly evaluation results found at http://www.ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/DataQuality/dataquality.asp). However, citing a Federally-conducted audit or the SSDQ map is not, by itself, sufficient to satisfy this requirement. The applicant must conduct its own review of the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of its CMV crash and inspection data and data systems (which, again, may include information from the SSDQ methodology and monthly evaluation or the Federally-conducted audit). The applicant must explain the findings of its review to satisfy this requirement.

Failure to affirmatively demonstrate the achievement of any of these requirements will result in the application being disqualified.

Section IV: Application and Submission Information

Application Information

The FMCSA utilizes Grants.gov (www.grants.gov) for accepting SaDIP grant applications.

All FY 2013 SaDIP applications must be submitted electronically through this site. To apply, the Applicant first must complete the Grants.gov registration process. To register, go to http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp and follow the instructions found on the Grants.gov website by selecting “Get Registered” .

The registration process can take as long as four weeks. Applicants are encouraged to register as soon as possible. The Grants.gov website provides customer support through its toll-free number, (800) 518-GRANT, or through e-mail at support@grants.gov. The customer support center is open from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, to address Grants.gov technical issues. The FMCSA does not own or maintain Grants.gov and is therefore unable to provide technical assistance; all technical assistance issues should be directed to the above contact information.

All applications must be submitted through Grants.gov by 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time on November 13, 2012. Applications received after this time will be considered only if funds remain available after the review process for timely applications. Due to unforeseen connectivity or technical issues associated with online submission, FMCSA strongly encourages all Applicants to submit their applications well in advance to allow for additional time if needed.

If the designated grant official from an Applicant requires special assistance or accommodation associated with submitting this grant application, methods other than Grants.gov are available. Please contact the Agency personnel listed in Section VII of this notice if assistance is required.

Application Requirements

All SaDIP grant applications for FY 2013 must include the following Standard Forms as provided in Grants.gov:

1. SF-424 – Application for Federal Assistance This is the standard application form for all requests for Federal assistance. When completing Section F, please ensure that the individual listed as the point of contact is knowledgeable about the project(s) listed in the application and can answer relevant questions.

2. SF-424A – Budget Information for Non-Construction Program This is a standard budget form for requests for Federal assistance. On page 1, the Applicant may indicate up to four (4) projects requested. The Applicant should clearly indicate the title of each project in the boxes provided in Column A. If there are more than four (4) projects proposed, please submit just the total for all projects on the SF-424A on Grants.gov and then provide the detailed breakdown of each project using the Excel version of the SF-424A form (located on the Grantee resources page at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/about/GRANTS/grantee-resources.aspx) as a supplemental form. Applicants may use as many supplemental forms as needed to provide a breakdown of each project. However, please ensure that when combined they tie to the total submitted through Grants.gov.

On page 1A, please clearly indicate up to four (4) projects listed on page 1 in Rows 1-4 (if applicable) and then fill in the appropriate object class categories in Rows A-K. See Appendix B – Guidance for Developing an Object Class Budget.

Please complete the remaining pages as appropriate. If the Applicant feels that an additional budget worksheet is necessary to further explain estimated costs, please attach a budget document to the Attachments Form (explained in #5 below). Attached budgets should be pre-formatted to print on standard, letter-sized paper (PDF format is preferable). If the Applicant attaches budget worksheets for multiple projects under the same grant application, each project should be clearly distinguished in the document.

3. SF-424B – Assurances for Non-Construction Programs This is a standard assurances form associated with accepting Federal assistance funds. This assurances document indicates that the Applicant organization is in substantial compliance with various programs, regulations, and Federal laws. This document should not be completed without confirmation from the appropriate agency or State official that the Applicant organization is indeed compliant. The FMCSA and other applicable Federal agencies reserve the right to request further information and/or conduct an audit to confirm compliance as indicated on this form, as provided for in the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations.

4. SF-LLL – Disclosure of Lobbying Activities This form requests information related to the lobbying activities of the Applicant.

5. Attachment Forms This document is used to submit supplemental attachments to support the grant application.

These attachments must include a copy of the Applicant’s approved indirect cost rate from its cognizant Federal agency if indirect costs are claimed (see Supplemental Information below).

Please note, applications received without the complete set of required forms will be not be evaluated until all forms are received. All forms are part of the application package available for download and completion in Grants.gov. Attachment file names must be limited to the following characters: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore (_), hyphen (-), space, and period. Using any other characters for attachment file names will cause the application to be rejected.

Attachments to the application MUST include:

the Applicant’s Project Narrative that includes a problem statement, objectives, goals, strategies and activities, an evaluation or monitoring plan, a description of the Applicant’s organizational capacity, and a budget narrative (see Appendix A – Guidance for Designing Performance-based Projects to see a sample performance-based plan);

line-item budget and a budget narrative that justifies the budget requested by line item;

current approved indirect cost rate letter, if applicable (see Supplemental Information);

FMCSA Administrative Capability Questionnaire;

Key Contacts Form (see Appendix C – Key Contacts Form Instructions); and Sufficient documentation to demonstrate achievement of the three SAFETEA-

LU eligibility requirements noted in Section III, Eligibility Information.

Supplemental Information

The Applicant should attach any supplemental information that it believes will support the proposal. However, the Applicant should limit the information provided to FMCSA to what is needed to evaluate the proposed projects and provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate achievement of the three SAFETEA-LU eligibility requirements noted in Section III, Eligibility Information. Descriptions of problems and proposed solutions should not exceed 3

– 4 pages in length unless they involve the most complicated of issues.

The FMCSA advises that:

If the Applicant is claiming indirect costs, a copy of the Applicant’s signed current approved indirect cost rate from the cognizant Federal agency should be included in the application.

When preparing an application package, Applicants should not save each application section as an individual document. All information relating to a single project request should be included in one document attached to the application package (PDF preferred).

Budgets and other information in charts or spreadsheets should be pre-formatted for printing on standard size copy paper.

Section V: Application Review Information

The FMCSA will review all application packages for FY 2013 SaDIP funding for eligibility, completeness, and timeliness of submission. The FMCSA will evaluate each of the required proposal elements: Problem Statement, Project Goal(s) and Objective(s), Work Plan, Evaluation or Monitoring Plan, Organizational Capacity, and the Budget Narrative. Reviewers will consider the below criteria and questions when reviewing each application for its impact on highway safety and applicability to the program’s purpose and FY 2013 program priorities.

Project Narrative

Problem Statement

This section documents the need for the proposed program and describes the unmet needs the Applicant intends to address. Applicants should describe the problem and provide supporting data whenever possible. Applicants should compare data to a baseline whenever possible. All data must be properly cited and clearly presented to minimize the need for additional validation.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Problem Statement, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant has demonstrated knowledge of the problems associated with the SaDIP program and clearly identified the barriers to successfully meeting the national priorities listed in this NOFA. The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following criteria in its evaluation:

1. How well does the application support applicable statutory and program requirements?

2. Does the application provide data to support the need or the problem it proposes to mitigate?

3. In considering data provided by the Applicant:

i. How well is the data quantified?

ii. Are the data sources identified and appropriate for the purposes used? To what extent?

iii. Does the application establish baseline measures or benchmarks to describe the problem statement? To what extent?

Project Goal(s) and Objective(s)

This section establishes the outcome-based goals and objectives of the grant activities and directly addresses the problem statement. The application should establish goals and objectives that are performance-based in nature and linked to increased highway safety, rather than simply identifying counts of specific activities. Objectives must be specific, measurable results expected within a particular grant performance period. The FMCSA will consider the reasonableness of these goals in evaluating the application. Further, if FMCSA awards a grant based on these project goals and objectives, it will use these Applicant-established goals to evaluate performance and for consideration in awarding future grants.

This section may explain broad themes for proposed actions and should reflect reasonable choices among alternative paths. Explanations of specific activities are not necessary.

Applicants are encouraged to review the current list of FMCSA studies that address State truck and/or bus data quality as it relates to completeness, timeliness, accuracy, and consistency. If a study relates to the Applicant’s jurisdiction, the study’s conclusions should be addressed in the application.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Project Goals and Objectives, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant describes sound program goals and objectives that are specific, measurable, and can likely be achieved during the grant period of performance. The FMCSA will also consider the extent to which the Applicant thoroughly explains why it selected the project goals and objectives to address the need(s) established in the Problem Statement. The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following questions in its evaluation:

1. How well does the project goal address FMCSA’s FY 2013 national priorities for SaDIP?

2. To what degree does the Applicant demonstrate an understanding of the SSDQ program?

3. How well does the project goal address the Applicant’s problem statement?

4. How well does the application establish project objectives that are measureable using the data sources identified?

5. How well does the application establish project objectives that are reasonable and feasible in their scope?

Work Plan: Proposed Tasks

This section should describe the various tasks and program activities the Applicant proposes to carry out using grant funds to accomplish the objectives and mitigate issues identified in the problem statement. The Work Plan must include a description of the site(s) where the work will be performed, the duration of each proposed task or activity, a list of required goods or services, the number of personnel necessary to conduct the activities, and the entire time schedule for the effort. The level of detail will vary according to the project, but should be concise and sufficient to support the project goal and justify the funding requested in the budget. This section is the core of the Applicant’s proposal.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Work Plan, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant describes tasks, activities, and timelines to achieve the project goals. The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following questions in its evaluation:

1. How well does the application describe tasks and activities that will help achieve the project objectives and mitigate the problem identified?

2. How well does the application describe the sites where the activities will be conducted?

3. How well does the application describe specific goods, services, and individuals or organizations necessary for the completion of tasks to support the project goal?

4. How well does the application establish detailed and feasible timelines for each proposed task or activity?

5. How well does the application identify implementation challenges and describe how the

Applicant may overcome them? How well does the application describe innovative or creative approaches to implementing the program (if applicable)?

6. How well does the application describe innovative or creative approaches to implementing the program (if applicable)?

7. How well does the Applicant describe an approach that is likely to result in improved accuracy, timeliness, completeness, and consistency of the State’s safety data which will result in a marked improvement to the SSDQ Map?

Evaluation or Monitoring Plan

In this section the Applicant explains how it will monitor its program strategies to ensure they are being implemented as designed and achieving the desired results. Applicants should use the program performance goals established earlier in the application and identify milestone measures during the performance period to achieve those goals. Applicants could also identify process evaluation measures that describe how their organization will remain focused on implementing a quality program on time and within budget. Finally, Applicants should provide additional information regarding the outcome evaluation to detail the types of measures that will be used to document the success of the proposed project. Applicants should describe how they plan to measure the effectiveness of each activity and strategy, such as using incremental benchmarks for a multi-phased strategy to determine whether targets/milestones were met. The following factors may be used by the Applicant to evaluate performance:

baseline data compared to new results;

effectiveness of strategies and activities;

monitoring plan and adjustments, as appropriate; and data for quarterly reports or annual update.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Evaluation or Monitoring Plan, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant thoroughly outlines how it will monitor the effective implementation of the strategies and document the project outcomes. The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following questions in its evaluation:

1. How well does the application describe an Evaluation/Monitoring Plan that assesses the overall performance of the proposed project?

2. How well does the application utilize iterative performance measures that are quantifiable, time-specific, and realistic?

3. How well does the application describe the performance measures that support the project outcome goals?

4. Does the application include data sources that are relevant to completing the evaluation? To what extent?

Organizational Capacity

In this section the Applicant demonstrates that it has the expertise to successfully implement the stated strategies and attain its stated goal(s). Organizational Capacity includes information related to the Applicant’s organizational goals, mission statement, structure, and other information relevant to the proposed project. Providing a description of the scope of current activities as well as key elements of previous and/or other motor carrier or highway safety programs demonstrates the Applicant organization’s ability to successfully implement program requirements and meet program expectations. It is also appropriate to reference any past performance descriptions and/or operating certifications/accreditations in this section.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Organizational Capacity, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant thoroughly documents its infrastructure and other organizational information to demonstrate an ability to perform the activities proposed in the application.

This may include past performance during previous projects. The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following questions in its evaluation:

1. How well does the Applicant describe its organization, mission, and infrastructure?

2. How well does the Applicant describe its work on current or past activities for similar projects?

3. How well does the Applicant demonstrate its capability to successfully implement the proposed project?

The FMCSA may also consider the following questions, based on information contained in Agency records; Applicants may include proprietary information to support this section of their application:

1. How well has the Applicant performed in achieving its goals in prior awards from

FMCSA?

2. How effectively has the Applicant utilized proposed funds in previous grants (based on remaining, unexpended balances at the end of similar efforts in previous grants)?

3. What is the actual or estimated amount of funds available for expenditure from previously issued grants for projects similar to those in the application?

Budget Narrative

This section describes the costs necessary to complete the proposed tasks and achieve the project goal. The Budget Narrative should thoroughly and clearly justify or explain each Budget Category (Object Class) and follow all guidelines and limitations as provided in the application package. The Budget Narrative must be clear, specific, detailed, and mathematically correct; it should correspond to the information and figures on the budget forms. A well-written Budget Narrative allows the Applicant and FMCSA to understand all costs included in the budget and to monitor the expenditure of funds and determine whether the budget items are allowable for reimbursement under Federal cost principles. Where appropriate, costs per unit will be calculated and compared with national averages to determine cost-effectiveness. As appropriate, proposed costs will be compared with historical information to confirm reasonableness. The level of detail should be sufficient to justify the funding requested.

Evaluation Criteria: In reviewing the Budget Narrative, FMCSA will consider the extent to which the Applicant describes costs that are allocable, allowable, reasonable, and necessary.

The FMCSA may consider any or all of the following questions in its evaluation:

1. How well does the application provide clear explanations of the costs associated with each Budget Category (Object Class)?

2. How well does the Budget Narrative support the funds requested on the application Budget forms? To what extent is the cost estimate commensurate with the volume of records to be improved?

3. How accurate are the mathematical computations in the Budget Narrative and in other budget forms?

4. How well does the application demonstrate a cost-effective approach that will provide a demonstrable impact on safety as the result of grant funds?

5. Does the application describe proposed project expenditures that are:

i. Allowable under the cost principles established in this NOFA and all

FMCSA cost eligibility policies;

ii. Allocable specifically to the activities proposed by the application;

iii. Reasonable in amount and quantity for the activities proposed;

iv. Necessary to conduct the activities proposed?

6. If applicable, how accurately is an Indirect Cost Rate (IDCR) applied to the budget?

7. If applicable, how accurately are fringe benefits applied to the budget?

Funding Decisions

This is a discretionary grant program. Funding decisions may depend on the quality and completeness of the information provided. The FMCSA does not have an appeals process for unsuccessful applications for discretionary grant funds.

Section VI: Award Administration Information

Upon receipt and approval of the complete SaDIP application package, FMCSA will award funding and enter into grant agreements as soon as administratively practicable. An award recipient may be required to submit a supplemental budget or project narrative based on a partial or modified grant award.

Funding amounts made available for reimbursement may be impacted by limitations placed on the spending authority and appropriations enacted for FMCSA.

Reporting responsibilities include quarterly program performance status using the Performance Progress Report (SF-PPR). The PPR should address any additional questions/factors as deemed appropriate by FMCSA.

Grantees must agree to the FMCSA Financial Assistance Agreement General Provisions and Assurances before grant funds will be awarded (see http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/chief-counsel/2012/2012-FMCSA-Grant- Provisions.pdf). These provisions require, but are not limited to, submission of quarterly financial (Federal Financial Report SF-425) and performance progress reports (PPR).

Additional information on quarterly reports and other required forms and templates is available at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/safety-initiatives/mcsap/ mcsapforms.htm.

Section VII: Agency Contact

This grant program is managed by:

Office of Safety Programs Office of the Associate Administrator for Enforcement Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration United States Department of Transportation

Contact your FMCSA Division Office for further information on this program or on related Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.

For general information about SaDIP funding and requirements, contact FMCSA Headquarters:

For questions on:

Administrative process and procedures: Technical and programmatic issues:

Jackie Cambridge Betsy Benkowski Transportation Specialist SaDIP Technical Program Manager Email (preferred): jackie.cambridge@dot.gov Email (preferred): betsy.benkowski@dot.gov Office: 202-366-3551 Office: 202-366-5387

Fax: 202-366-1350 Fax: 202-493-0292

By Mail: By Mail:

U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE, West Building 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE, West Building Washington, DC 20590 Washington, DC 20590 ATTN: Jackie Cambridge (MC-ESS) ATTN: Betsy Benkowski (MC-RRA)

Section VIII: Other Information

The FMCSA Grant Programs Website: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/grants/grants.aspx.

The FMCSA Grantee Resources Website: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/about/GRANTS/grantee-resources.aspx.

A - 1

APPENDIX A

GUIDANCE FOR DESIGNING PERFORMANCE-BASED PROJECTS

FMCSA seeks to award funding for performance-based programs. When applying for grant opportunities, Applicants should describe program goals, objectives, and outcomes before describing the specific tasks necessary to achieve them. By focusing on the outcome or impact of a program, the Applicant is better able to explain to FMCSA the need for financial assistance.

When requesting grant funding for multiple projects within a single grant application, Applicants should discuss each project individually. That is, Applicants must provide clear and concise problem statements, proposed solutions, explanations of the resources necessary to achieve the desired outcomes, and expected timelines for each project, keeping all relevant information for individual efforts separated. Applicants should address all of the components of each project, in sequence, before addressing a different project. This approach allows FMCSA to fully evaluate the merits of each project individually.

The following provides general guidance on preparing a typical Project Narrative and Budget Narrative for a discretionary grant. Please note that each FMCSA announcement will provide specific guidance regarding the format of the application, the required elements, and evaluation criteria.

I. Project Narrative

The Project Narrative section of the application is where the Applicant describes what problem or need it intends to address with grant funds, the goals and objectives the project expects to accomplish, proposed tasks and timelines, and how the effectiveness of the project design will be measured. The Project Narrative should be succinct, self-explanatory, and well-organized so that reviewers can understand each component of the proposed project. Project Narrative sections are described below.

a. Problem Statement

This section documents the need for the proposed program and describes the unmet needs to be addressed, with data clearly presented and cited. The following is a sample crash-based Problem Statement:

[COUNTY] in the northwest corridor of I-99 in [STATE], is ranked XX among the XX counties in [STATE] for the number of fatal and injury crashes among large trucks and buses.1 In the most recent five years for which data are documented (YEAR – YEAR), XX people have lost their lives due to crashes caused by [FACTOR].2 The data also suggests that [FACTOR-2] is increasing as the proximate cause of crashes during the heaviest traffic times.

Data Source(s) Fatalities by State. Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), www.fars.nhtsa.dot.gov

2008 Collision Statistics. 2010 Highway Safety Funding Guideline. Page XX.

A - 2

The following is a sample of a non-enforcement-related Problem Statement:

The State of CDLandia currently conducts CDL knowledge and skills testing according to a modified version of the AAMVA 2.0 testing model. This version is no longer compliant with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.1

Data Source(s) 1 Commercial Driver’s License Testing and Commercial Learner’s Permit Standards Rule [76 FR 26854, May 9, 2011]

b. Goal(s) and Objective(s)

This section establishes the outcome-based goals and objectives of the grant activities and directly addresses the problem statement.

Effective Goals and Objectives are:

• Specific

• Measureable

• Action-oriented

• Realistic

• Time-phased

The FMCSA will consider the reasonableness of these goals and objectives in evaluating the application. Further, if FMCSA awards a grant based on these project goals and objectives, it will use these Applicant-established goals to evaluate performance for consideration of future grants.

Sample Goal: The State of Borderland requests Federal financial assistance through the FY 2013 BEG program to reduce the number of crashes involving unsafe trucks crossing U.S.

international borders operated by foreign carriers and/or drivers. Grant funds will be used to support activities that provide targeted enforcement activities as the strategy to achieve this goal.

Sample Objectives:

1. To decrease fatalities involving vehicles entering the U.S. from a foreign country by

___%, from ____# during FY 2012 to ____# by September 30, 2013

2. To increase safety inspections of vehicles entering the US from a foreign country by

___%, from ____# during FY 2012 to ____# by September 30, 2013

3. To increase the knowledge of highway safety from a baseline of ____% to ____% among individuals attending one of the five safety enforcement education/publicity campaigns for compliance with CMV safety standards and regulations focusing on drivers of vehicles entering the US from a foreign country conducted during FY 2013

A - 3

c. Work Plan: Proposed Tasks

This section describes the various tasks and program activities the Applicant proposes to carry out using grant funds to accomplish the objectives and mitigate the issues identified in the problem statement. This section should not be based upon specific dates, but based on award date plus duration of time needed to complete each task. Vague timeframes such as “Summer 2013” are not acceptable.

Project Strategy The Applicant describes the strategy it plans to implement to achieve its

Goals and Objectives.

Project Activity The Applicant describes the activities to be performed to implement each Project Strategy, including time frames for each activity.

Note: The Applicant may implement more than one strategy to achieve the stated performance objective. In those instances, the strategy, project activity measure(s), Work Plan and Evaluation / Monitoring sections as well as the Budget Narrative should remain sequenced within the document to allow for easier review.

Sample Work Plan:

Strategy: Conduct Targeted Safety Enforcement Education Activities

Time Frame

Proposed Activity/Milestone Location

Responsible Party

Level of Effort

Award + 90 days

Identify date and locations to begin safety enforcement targeted education campaign (and provide day-to-day support for duration of project)

Applicant agency

Project Assistant (1)

.5 FTE

Award + 90 days

Identify Educator, locations to provide education, and any other needed resources (and provide oversight for duration of project)

Applicant agency

Project Manager (1)

.5 FTE

Award + 120

Design questionnaires for pre/post surveys

Consultant agency

Consultant (1)

100 hours

Award + 200

Conduct safety enforcement education classes and pre/post tests

Truck driving schools, trucker associations

Educators (2)

2 @ 120 hours each

Award + 330

Evaluate results of pre/post tests for safety enforcement education classes, write report

Consultant agency location

Consultant (1)

1 @ 200 hours

A - 4

d. Identification / Resolution of Challenges

This section should discuss any challenges that potentially could arise in the design or implementation of the activities described in the Work Plan. Applicants should be sure to include strategies that could be used to mitigate these challenges. This is a section that often is not included by Applicants; however, it is particularly useful for new grants and/or project designs for which it is unclear how well they will perform.

e. Evaluation / Monitoring Plan

In this section the Applicant should explain how it will monitor its program strategies to ensure they are being implemented as designed and achieving the desired results. The Evaluation Plan is the roadmap that will serve as a guide through each step of the evaluation. Each objective should have at least one strategy and each strategy should have at least one project activity measure. Project activity measures are specific, observable, and measurable characteristics or changes that show the progress a program is making towards achieving a specified goal or objective. Once the project activity measures are identified, the sources of data and how the data will be collected will need to be determined. Some data collection methods are more appropriate for process evaluation (such as a count of the number of times an activity is conducted), while other methods are more appropriate for outcome evaluation (such as measuring change in knowledge using pre- and post-survey results).

Project Activity Measure The Applicant describes how it will quantifiably measure the activities, e.g., number of staff hours, details completed/performed, or other measures of the particular activities.

Evaluation / Monitoring The Applicant describes how it will evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of each respective Project Activity Measure against the Work Plan and Project Strategy. Incremental benchmarks must be described and included for a multi-phased strategy.

A - 5

Sample Monitoring / Evaluation Plan Outline

Objective: To conduct five (5) safety enforcement education/publicity campaigns for compliance with CMV safety standards and regulations focusing on drivers use of handheld cellular devices.

Proposed Strategy:

Project Activity Measure:

Data Source:

Communicating Results

Responsible Party/Agency

Media Campaign project activities are being conducted at the planned level (quantity and quality)

Number, length, type, and time of day media ads are aired

Logs;

Amount of spending

To whom:

Stakeholders, Funder

How: Quarterly Report, Final Report, Website

Project Manager

Outreach/Education project activities are:

a) being conducted at the planned level (quantity and quality)

Number of classes conducted, length of time for each class

Sign-in sheets

To whom:

Stakeholders, Funder

How: Quarterly Report, Final Report

Educator

b) moving in the desired direction

Survey results demonstrating increased knowledge / awareness

Pre- and post- tests conducted & analyzed

To whom:

Stakeholders, Funder

How: Final Report, Fact Sheet, Website

Consultant

f. Organizational Capacity

In this section the Applicant should demonstrate it has the expertise to successfully implement the stated strategies and attain its stated goal(s). The following is a sample outline for an Organizational Capacity statement:

The [FULL LEGAL NAME OF ORGANIZATION/AGENCY] [TYPE OF ORGANIZATION] was established in [YEAR] [FOR THE PURPOSE OF]. The location of the organization’s headquarters and applicable operating sites [NAME, CITY, COUNTY, STATE]. Describe the organization’s background or history and important milestones in relation to highway safety.

Describe the organization’s [MISSION]. The agency/organization possesses a proven capability to assist FMCSA in achieving its mission to improve the safety of commercial motor vehicles and save lives by conducting [PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES].

Describe the agency/organization’s most important achievements, current and past, and/or operating certifications/accreditations.

II. Budget Narrative

This section describes the costs necessary to complete the proposed tasks and achieve the project goal(s). The Budget Narrative should thoroughly and clearly justify or explain each Budget Category (Object Class) and follow all guidelines and limitations as provided in the application

A - 6 package. The budget narrative must be clear, specific, detailed, and mathematically correct; it should correspond to the information and figures on the budget forms. A well-written Budget Narrative allows the Applicant and FMCSA to understand all costs included in the budget and to monitor the expenditure of funds to determine whether the budget items are allowable for reimbursement under the Federal cost principles. As appropriate, proposed costs will be compared with historical information to confirm reasonableness. The level of detail should be sufficient to justify the funding requested.

The Budget Narrative provides justification for all budget line items as to the relevance of the proposed project costs. FMCSA Grant Budgets consist of three components:

Budget Narrative – provides the methodology explaining the numbers SF-424A Form – breaks down the budget into object class categories Line-item budget – provides the detail behind each of the SF-424A object class categories and is project specific

The Budget Narrative is based on both the SF-424A Object Code Categories and the line item budget. For example:

Personnel: All personnel are permanent full-time State employees unless otherwise specified. Personnel could include one Project Manager, at a rate of X working on the proposed BEG project at 50% FTE and one Training Officer, at a rate of Y, fully dedicated to the BEG project to arrive at total dollars.

Travel: This estimate is based on 10 travel nights at $150 per night (lodging and per diem – government vehicle used) for two people to travel to 10 sites to provide BEG education activities: $3,000.

Supplies: Printing costs: $0.25 per test for 5,000 pre-test surveys and 5,000 post-test surveys to be conducted as part of the BEG education activities to measure change in knowledge: $2,500.

If multiple projects are proposed in one grant application, Applicants should group expenses separately for each project using the object class categories provided in Standard Form 424A - Budget Information. Applicants should ensure that detailed narratives are provided for each project in each proposal. Budget Narratives should describe how the Federal funds are to be used. For example, a project involving personnel would explain each position to be filled and how it applies to the project and Federal funds.

If there are more than four (4) projects proposed, Applicants should only submit the total for all projects on the SF-424A on Grants.gov and then provide the detailed breakdown of each project using the Excel version of the SF-424A form (located on the Grantee resources page at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/about/GRANTS/grantee-resources.aspx) as a supplemental form.

Applicants may use as many supplemental forms as needed to provide a breakdown of each project. However, Applicants should ensure that when supplemental forms are combined, they tie to the total amount submitted through Grants.gov.

B - 1

APPENDIX B

GUIDANCE FOR DEVELOPING AN OBJECT CLASS

BUDGET

Guidance for completing Object Class Categories on Form 424-A, under Section…