may5fy15 ojjdp dual system design study solicitation.pdf

OMB No. 1121-0329

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

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is seeking applications under its Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Design Study of Dual System Youth (i.e., youth who are involved in both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems). This program furthers the Department’s mission by supporting the development of a research design and methodology to collect data and generate statistical information on the prevalence of dual system youth and the intersection of the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

OJJDP FY 2015 Design Study of Dual System Youth

Eligibility

In general, OJJDP is authorized to make grants to, or enter into contracts or cooperative agreements with, states (including territories), units of local government, federally recognized Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior), nonprofit and for-profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education), and certain qualified individuals. For-profit organizations must agree to forgo any profit or management fee. Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and foreign institutions of higher education are not eligible to apply.

OJJDP welcomes applications that involve two or more entities; however, one eligible entity must be the applicant and the other(s) must be proposed as subrecipient(s). The applicant must be the entity with primary responsibility for conducting and leading the project. If successful, the applicant will monitor and manage any subrecipients or, as applicable, administer any procurement subcontracts that the applicant might make under the award.

OJJDP will consider only one application per lead applicant; however, subrecipients may be part of multiple proposals. (Applicants should also review and consider the “Duplicate Applications” note under How To Apply in Section D. Application and Submission Information.)

OJJDP 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.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ http://www.ojjdp.gov/ http://www.ojjdp.gov/

OJJD-2015-4126

Deadline

Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 26, 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. 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 OJJDP contact identified below within 24 hours after the application deadline and request approval to submit their application. Additional information on reporting technical issues is found under “Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues” in the How To Apply section.

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact the Response Center by telephone at 800-851-3420, by e-mail at responsecenter@ncjrs.gov, or by web chat at https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. Answers to frequently asked questions that may assist applicants are posted at www.ojjdp.gov/grants/solicitations/FY2015/FAQ/DualSystemStudyFAQ.pdf.

Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: OJJD-2015-4126

Release date: April 7, 2015 Update: April 10, 2015 Update: May 5, 2015 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 mailto:responsecenter@ncjrs.gov https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp http://www.ojjdp.gov/grants/solicitations/FY2015/FAQ/DualSystemStudyFAQ.pdf

Contents

A. Program Description

Overview

Program-Specific Information

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

B. Federal Award Information

Type of award

Financial management and system of internal controls. If selected for

Budget Information

Cost sharing or match requirement

Preagreement cost approvals

Limitation on use of award funds for employee compensation; waiver

Prior approval, planning, and reporting of conference/meeting/training costs

Costs associated with language assistance (if applicable)

C. Eligibility Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

Limit on number of application submissions

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

How To Apply

E. Application Review Information

Selection Criteria

Review Process

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements

General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

H. Other Information

Provide Feedback to OJP

Application Checklist

OJJDP FY 2015 Design Study of Dual System Youth

(CFDA #16.818)

A. Program Description

Overview

The Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDP Act) of 2002 directs OJJDP to pursue research that enhances the field’s understanding of “juveniles who, prior to placement in the Juvenile Justice system, were under the care or custody of the State Child Welfare system, and juveniles who are unable to return to their family after completing their disposition in the Juvenile Justice system and who remain wards of the State.” The intent is to generate information on the prevalence and incidence of youth fitting these criteria (i.e., dual system youth) and strategies to improve coordination between the juvenile justice and child welfare systems and improve outcomes for these youth.

OJJDP is seeking applications for funding under its Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Design Study of Dual System Youth. This design study (and related case studies) will identify effective and efficient strategies to measure the prevalence of dual system youth; identify the status of coordination and data sharing between the juvenile and criminal justice and child welfare systems (including expanding beyond delinquency or dependency court involvement to potentially include youth contact with law enforcement [e.g., arrests] and child protection agencies [e.g., child welfare cases]); and identify avenues for improved coordination and data sharing across systems.

Authorizing legislation: This program is authorized under paragraph (11) under the State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance heading in the Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2015, Pub. L. No. 113-235, 128 Stat. 2130, 2193.

Program-Specific Information

The JJDP Act of 2002 emphasizes the development of knowledge regarding the relationship between the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. The premise is that child welfare-involved youth are at a heightened risk of entry to the juvenile justice system due to their relatively high rates of trauma, abuse, neglect, and lack of resources. Additionally, this population may be at particularly high risk of harm when entering the justice system—they are especially vulnerable—and their custody status upon departure from juvenile residential placement may impact their later reinvolvement in the juvenile or criminal justice systems.

In 2003, OJJDP conducted a nationally representative study of youth in residential placement that found that 9 percent of respondents placed in residential facilities received care from a foster parent at some point prior to commitment and a little more than 6 percent were in the care of a foster parent immediately prior to detention. Little is known about the extent to which youth in foster care come into contact with the juvenile justice system via arrest and the prevalence of youth leaving juvenile residential facilities who do not return home but are instead placed in foster care. This information has profound implications for how the child welfare and juvenile justice systems coordinate assessment, court involvement and/or diversion, treatment, services, and reentry/aftercare.

More recently, OJJDP funded the National Center for Juvenile Justice to investigate the status of data sharing between juvenile delinquency court and youth dependency court data systems in the United States. This work will help build a more comprehensive understanding of state data collectors, data systems, and data architecture underlying these child-serving systems. OJJDP recognizes that focusing on court involvement captures only a small segment of the youth population that interacts with these systems.

Consequently, OJJDP is pursuing a design study that will focus on various pathways into and intersections between the Justice and Child Welfare systems (e.g., juvenile court, family or dependency court, probation/parole, etc.). Entry into, and departure from, the juvenile justice system is an understudied and critical aspect of overlap between the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, and understanding the earliest points of intersection between these systems should suggest ways to prevent both youths’ deeper penetration into the justice system and the cycling of youth in and out of dependency and delinquency courts’ jurisdiction. The design study should also examine the intersection of race, ethnicity, gender, class, and sexual orientation of youth who are involved with both the justice and child welfare systems. This investigation will help OJJDP develop an understanding of the timing of encounters with each system; compare youth who come into contact with these systems with similarly situated youth who do not come into contact with the justice and child welfare systems; and understand system-level processes that guide the experience and outcomes of youth once they come into contact with these systems.

OJJDP expects that building knowledge of these intersections will require both individual-level analyses of youth data and aggregate-level research on systems within and/or across jurisdictions. This will likely also require matching administrative records and obtaining aggregate-level information that describes systems as a whole (e.g., staffing levels, budgets, data architecture or sharing, and policies). Insights are likely to come both from analysis of structured administrative data and case studies of systems or interviews with administrators of juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

This project will develop a robust research design and sampling and data analysis plan to integrate the collection of administrative data from both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems. This plan will be informed by qualitative case study data and policy level information that focuses on the many points of intersection between the juvenile justice and child welfare systems to answer the following questions:

how often juvenile justice involvement precedes child welfare placement.

how often child welfare-involved youth come into contact with the juvenile and criminal justice systems.

how well these systems coordinate (share data and coordinate activities, such as case management, assessment, court involvement, services/treatment, etc.).

http://www.ojjdp.gov/grants/solicitations/FY2012/NatlCtDataArchive.pdf what systematic changes should occur to create better coordination and services for these youth.

Importantly, the goal of this project is to identify persuasive, meaningful, and consistent definitions of juvenile justice and child welfare involvement. OJJDP has an interest in identifying the earliest point (i.e., arrest) of youth contact with the justice system to prevent further or more serious involvement. Consequently, OJJDP expects that a focus on arrests and out-of-home/foster placement are central to understanding early intersections and may offer the most effective and efficient locus for research to help prevent future delinquency and increase wellbeing of these children. However, OJJDP also expects that information on juvenile justice adjudications of delinquency and commitment to out-of-home placement may offer a valuable avenue for system coordination around treatment and services. Applicants should propose preliminary definitions of these two types of involvement in the context of system improvement, research potential and data accessibility, and improving outcomes for youth.

More specifically, OJJDP is seeking applications to design, develop, and (potentially) engage in data collection procedures to accomplish the following goals:

1. Identify how often juvenile justice involvement precedes or coincides with child welfare placement and how often children in child welfare later come into contact with the juvenile justice or criminal justice systems. Applicants should also set forth a plan to partition prevalence by important demographic characteristics (e.g., what is the prevalence for girls?).

2. Identify the characteristics of children/youth in the child welfare system that are associated with involvement in both juvenile or criminal justice systems. For example, do children in the child welfare system with certain demographic characteristics, victimization histories, or specific case plans have higher rates of arrest and/or placement and detention?

3. Identify the race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexual orientation of children who are involved with both the juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

4. Identify which system-level features of the child welfare system are associated with justice system involvement. For example, do higher rates of funding per child, more staff per child, use of needs-assessment tools, or other policies and practices correspond with lower rates of arrest among children involved with the child welfare system?

5. Produce case studies of data sharing and effective coordination between justice and child welfare systems. This will include obtaining qualitative data describing jurisdictions in which juvenile justice and child welfare systems are modeling successful approaches to system integration and service coordination; highlighting challenges and barriers to identifying and providing services for dual system youth; and documenting the extent to which existing administrative data/performance metrics within these jurisdictions suggests improved youth outcomes and reduced recidivism or system-involvement.

Applicants should demonstrate that their methodology for obtaining this information meets the standards and practices of the scientific and federal research communities.

6. Cost includes estimates of the costs of design options and insight into the benefits and challenges of alternate strategies.

Applicants for funding under this announcement should provide a synopsis of their background in the field that documents their expertise with the issues, demonstrates that their institution has the infrastructure to complete a large scale and cross jurisdictional research project, and describes the administrative capabilities to undertake a project of this scope.

Objectives/deliverables. Proposals should describe the products that the grantee will produce from the project. The successful applicant will submit relevant reports and deliverables to OJJDP that will be a part of their progress reporting or special reports and include the following:

description of efficient and effective strategies for collecting reliable and valid counts of the number of youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system prior to child welfare involvement and the number of youth in child welfare who come into contact with the juvenile justice system.

assessment and evaluation of the availability and quality of data at national and/or state-level(s); if necessary, identify subgroups (e.g., counties, large cities) that may be studied systematically; test strategies for providing reliable estimates; assess the influence of missing data on estimates.

identify key constructs, variables and the recommended measurement instruments that will capture the necessary information.

cost estimate for proposed study(ies) and component parts of potential research plans.

develop efficient and effective strategies for collecting reliable and valid administrative data on the type and timing of child welfare encounters/actions (e.g., being removed from the home) and juvenile justice events/actions (e.g., arrest). That is, develop strategies to obtain and integrate data and describe the counts of cases but also describe youth in terms of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, geography, and timing/type of encounters with each system.

describe and evaluate the challenges associated with collecting information on child welfare-involved youth (e.g., foster care), their criminal histories (juvenile and adult), child welfare administrative data, child welfare case file reviews, cross jurisdictional differences in child welfare systems, and comparison statistics for similarly situated youth within foster care who do not come into contact with the juvenile justice or criminal justice systems. This should include categorizing and defining variables that should be collected and standardized across juvenile justice and child welfare systems.

recommend research designs to obtain information about (1) the prevalence of dual system youth, (2) the collection and processing of administrative child welfare data and justice data for a cross jurisdictional sample of dual system youth, and (3) multiple case studies that provide examples of system integration and service coordination; highlight challenges and barriers to identifying and providing services for dual system youth; and document the extent to which existing administrative data/performance metrics within these jurisdictions suggests improved youth outcomes and reduced recidivism or system-involvement (e.g., arrest or arrest rates).

In addition to required data sets, a draft and final summary overview of research results, interim and final progress and financial reports,1 OJJDP expects scholarly products to result from each award under this solicitation, taking the form of one or more published, peer-reviewed, scientific journal articles, and/or (if appropriate) law review journal articles, book chapter(s) or book(s) in the academic press, technological prototypes, patented inventions, or similar scientific products.

Project Management, Sample Design, Rationale, and Data Collection Methodology

Task 1: Project management

a. Project timeline. Within 3 weeks of budget approval from OJJDP, the recipient will meet with OJJDP to discuss the proposed tasks. The recipient will then develop a detailed timetable outlining the dates of completion of each task, the date of delivery of each deliverable and status report, and the dates of scheduled meetings.

b. Meetings. The applicant will meet with specific organizations to inform project planning, development, and management. These meetings include, but are not limited to:

1) Kick-off meeting with OJJDP to discuss plans and schedule activities for the project period.

2) Conference calls to discuss project progress and status conducted every month.

3) OJJDP-scheduled stakeholder meetings, as directed; these partners include other federal agencies (e.g., Administration for Children and Families), academics, and state and local organizations. Recipients should be prepared to assist OJJDP and participate in meetings on this project.

4) Working group meeting(s).

5) Wrap-up meeting to present project results, findings, and recommendations to

OJJDP and other federal partners.

c. Status reports: The applicant will:

1) Provide monthly written reports that update the status on areas such as tasks and expenditures.

2) During data collection, provide weekly reports on the status of sample collection and para-data, such as number of interviews conducted (if applicable).

Task 1 deliverable. A written timeline for the entire project (all tasks) with the design and testing tasks more fully specified.

Task 2: Methodological development

The funding recipient will work with OJJDP to develop cost-effective, statistically efficient sampling designs and data collection strategies to use in studying juvenile justice involvement patterns among dual system youth. In developing these sample designs and data collection strategies, the recipient will consult with a working group of experts and

1 See “Federal Award Administration Information” (“General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements”) section of this solicitation, below, for additional information.

collaborate with OJJDP to identify data sources and strategies to accomplish the goals outlined above.

a. Working group. The recipient will convene an expert working group to discuss views about the locus of the study, the challenges associated with measuring key constructs and integrating data systems from child welfare and juvenile justice systems, and strategies to address these challenges. The working group will hold at least two meetings either in person or via conference call/web prior to the submission of the final research design.

b. Data collection methodology. The funding recipient will design data collection procedures for obtaining the prevalence of dual system youth (e.g., a 1-day count, over a calendar year, or other reasonable metrics). This also includes identifying a methodology to measure and analyze the count, type, and timing of juvenile justice and child welfare contacts. The recipient will also identify a strategy to obtain comparison information and thus determine the ways in which juvenile justice histories are similar and different from similarly situated youth in the child welfare system who do not become involved with the juvenile or criminal justice systems.

In addition, the recipient will identify what data are obtainable within administrative records systems (e.g., transactional data systems, data warehouses) that can be linked between juvenile justice and child welfare systems to better understand dual system youth. The recipient will also identify what information is obtainable with respect to case-file data and how this information could further illuminate processes by which case management or system-level policies facilitate success or failure of child welfare (i.e., arrests of child welfare-involved youth). Similarly, the applicant should offer advice on the costs and benefits of pursuing these different types of data. For example, case file data may be marginally valuable above and beyond administrative records but also represent extraordinary increases in costs and regulatory challenges.

Finally, the recipient will identify case studies of examples of data sharing, system integration, and service coordination. By providing rich descriptions of strategies that have led to system reform and integration, the recipient will both inform future research (e.g., generate potential hypotheses to test) and communicate meaningful information on substantive issues facing policymakers in the near term. This may require review of official documents (e.g., annual reports) and interviews with system leadership.

c. Research plan. The recipient will produce a detailed research plan outlining multiple options for accomplishing the goals of this future research agenda. That is, the recipient will (1) provide estimates of prevalence of dual system youth, (2) describe integration or cooperation between systems, and (3) identify avenues for improving system cooperation. If a proposed strategy to obtain statistical data at the national level is not possible, the recipient should identify and describe systematic data collection at a subnational but meaningful unit (e.g., all major cities). At the least, this should involve a plan to sample at least five jurisdictions that vary in key aspects of the population they serve (e.g., urban/rural; minority density; economic resources). The detailed research plan will describe data that can be accessed, linked, and analyzed (e.g., administrative data), budget needs, and timeline for completion of research.

Task 2 deliverables. (1) A written report detailing data availability, analytic strategy, research design and plan(s), timing, and cost-estimates for implementing the plan(s) and

(2) a written report highlighting case studies in jurisdictions that offer examples of system integration and service coordination, illustrate challenges and barriers to identifying and providing services for dual system youth, and document the extent to which existing administrative data/performance metrics within these jurisdictions may suggest improved youth outcomes and reduced recidivism or system-involvement (i.e., arrest or arrest rates). OJJDP, at its own discretion, may require the recipient to (3) produce up to two OJJDP bulletins detailing the key findings from the study. At least one will focus on the child welfare system explicitly.

Task 3: Documents for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Paperwork Reduction Act project approval

The recipient will prepare and provide to OJJDP draft materials for OMB clearance for all data collection efforts undertaken as part of this proposed project. These include (if applicable to the research plan) the 30- and 60-day notices, form 83i, supporting statement, justification memorandum, and copies of all survey documents/instruments, including but not limited to the extraction of transactional data, collection of case file information, interviews with child welfare personnel, etc.

Task 3 deliverables. The recipient will provide a written report detailing available data and techniques to link them, FAQs for respondents, and documents for OMB project approval with the following capabilities, if applicable: data collection instruments, collection of paradata, performing selected data checks and edits, etc.

Task 4: Engage in research/data collection, as articulated in above three tasks (contingent on future funding)

Pending approval of the OJJDP Administrator, grantee performance, and availability of funds, OJJDP may ask the recipient to implement the research plan as described above. In the case of a supplemental award, the OJJDP Administrator or his/her designated staff will articulate new tasks, timelines, and other requirements.

Task 4 deliverables. The recipient will deliver a written report detailing the research design, data collection and analysis methodology, cost analysis, and policy implications of the research project. The recipient will also produce at least one OJJDP bulletin detailing the key findings from the study.

Task 5: Archive data (contingent on future funding)

The recipient will develop and document data processing and editing procedures for—

1) Data cleaning, skip pattern, consistency, and out-of-range checks.

2) Data conversion.

3) Nonresponse adjustment procedures.

4) Preliminary data file and codebook documentation.

The recipient will also develop the data edits, data conversion, nonresponse adjustment procedures, and data documentation for OJJDP review. Data edits and processing should follow closely the procedures that social scientists and other federal agencies commonly use.

Task 5 deliverables. The recipient will archive the final deidentified data set with the National Archive of Criminal Justice data.

Additional Resources

Due to project delays, the OJJDP 2012 National Juvenile Court Data Archive “Dual System Youth Feasibility Study,” CDFA #16.523 is not available. OJJDP anticipates receipt and release of the report in Fall 2015.

MacArthur Foundation “Models for Change—Dual status youth” Juvenile Justice initiative.

B. Federal Award Information

Amount and Length of Awards

OJJDP will make one grant award for a 1-year project period. Applicants should submit a 1-year budget not to exceed $750,000, using the budget detail worksheet to accomplish tasks 1–3 above. Applicants should propose an award start date of October 1, 2015.

If the applicant is proposing a project that reasonably could be conducted in discrete phases, with each phase resulting in completion of one or more significant, defined milestones, then OJJDP strongly recommends that the applicant structure the application to clearly set out each phase, including specifically the narrative, expected scholarly products, timelines/milestones, and budget detail worksheet and budget narrative. (This is particularly the case if the applicant proposes a project that exceeds the cost limit or the 1-year project period for an individual award (or awards) under this solicitation.) Given limitations on the availability to OJJDP of funds for research, development, and evaluation awards, this information will assist OJJDP in considering whether partial funding of proposals that would not receive full funding would be productive. (If OJJDP elects to fund only certain phases of a proposed project in FY 2015, the expected scholarly products from the partial-funding award may, in some cases, vary from those described above.)

OJJDP may provide incremental funding for an additional three years for a 48 month project period. Important considerations in decisions regarding supplemental funding include, among other factors, the availability of funding, strategic priorities, OJJDP’s assessment of the quality of the management of the award (for example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and OJJDP’s 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 award2. OJJDP expects to make any award from this solicitation in the form of a grant.

Note: OJJDP will expect any recipient of an award under this solicitation to comply with Department of Justice regulations on confidentiality and human subjects’ protection. See “Evidence, Research, and Evaluation Guidance and Requirements” under “Solicitation

2 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://www.macfound.org/ http://www.macfound.org/

Requirements” in the OJP Funding Resource Center. Also, because the protection of human subjects is a critical issue for OJP and this project potentially will involve human subjects, applicants should explain the steps they will take to ensure that Internal Review Board review and approval is obtained before any OJP-funded research or data collection regarding human subjects commences.

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

OJJDP will not fund the following:

proposals primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (A budget may include these items if they are necessary to conduct research, development, demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.)

proposals that are not responsive to this specific solicitation.

pursuant to the JJDP Act, grantees may not use OJJDP funds for any biomedical or behavior control experimentation on individuals or any research involving such experimentation.

http://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm http://gfm.webfirst.com/ http://www.ojjdp.gov/about/jjdpa2002titlev.pdf

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

Preagreement cost approvals. OJP does not typically approve preagreement 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 year3. The 2015 salary table for SES employees is available at the Office of Personnel Management website. 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 OJJDP Administrator 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/funding/confcost.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

3 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/funding/confcost.htm and of some such costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, including a general prohibition of all food and beverage costs.

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

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

C. Eligibility Information

Eligibility. For additional eligibility information, see the 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, OJJDP 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 affect negatively 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 determined to be nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation or that do not include the application elements that OJJDP has designated to be critical will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration.

Under this solicitation, OJJDP has designated the following application elements as critical:

Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, Budget Narrative, and resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel. For purposes of this solicitation, key personnel means the principal investigator and all co-principal investigators. Review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How To Apply to ensure applications are submitted in permitted formats.

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

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

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

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

2. Project Abstract

The project abstract is an important part of the application that introduces the proposed project. OJJDP uses the project abstract for a number of purposes, including assignment of the application to an appropriate review panel. If the application is funded, the project abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe the project.

Applications should include a high-quality project abstract that summarizes the proposed project in 250-400 words. 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.

The abstract should include a description of:

• the purpose of the project, the problem to be investigated, and the anticipated relevance to juvenile justice policy, practice, and theory.

• the study site(s) and target population, including number of subjects and other relevant attributes.

• the research design and methodology, including the type of data, collection strategies, instruments, study sites, and other methods or procedures (see pages 5- 11).

• the techniques proposed for data analysis.

• the expected deliverables, such as data sets, interim and final reports, and other dissemination plans (see pages 5-11).

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

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html

Project abstracts should follow the detailed template (including the detailed instructions as to content) available here.

Permission to share project abstract with the public. It is unlikely that OJJDP 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 if OJJDP does not fund the proposed project. 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 project 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

Applicants must submit a program narrative that presents a detailed description of the purpose, goals, objectives, strategies, design, and management of the proposed program. The program narrative should be double-spaced with 1-inch margins, not exceeding 30 pages of 8½ by 11 inches, and use a standard 12-point font, preferably Times New Roman. Pages should be numbered “1 of 30,” etc. The tables, charts, pictures, etc., including all captions, legends, keys, subtext, etc., may be single-spaced and will count in the 30-page limit. Material required under the Budget and Budget Narrative and Additional Attachments sections will not count toward the program narrative page count. Applicants may provide bibliographical references as a separate attachment that will not count toward the 30-page program narrative limit. If the program narrative fails to comply with these length-related restrictions, OJJDP may consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions.

The program narrative should address the following selection criteria: (1) statement of the problem and research questions; (2) program design and implementation; (3) potential impact; and (4) capabilities/competencies. The applicant should clearly delineate the connections between and among each of these sections. For example, the project design section should clearly explain how the program’s structure and activities will respond to the problem statement identified in the previous section (see pages 4-9).

Program Narrative Guidelines:

a. Title page. (not counted against the narrative page limit). This page should include the title of the project, submission date, funding opportunity number, and the name and complete contact information (that is, address, telephone number, and e-mail address) for both the applicant organization and the principal investigator.

http://nij.gov/funding/documents/nij-project-abstract-template.pdf

b. Table of contents and figures. (not counted against the narrative page limit).

c. Main body. This section should describe the proposed project in depth. Applicants should include the following sections as part of the program narrative:

(1) Statement of the problem and research questions. Applicants should briefly describe the nature and scope of the problem that the program will address (i.e., research gaps in risk assessment). The applicant should use data to provide evidence of the need, demonstrate the size and scope of the need, and document the effects of the need on the target population and the larger community.

Applicants should discuss their research questions and how their proposed study addresses the gaps identified(see pages 4-5).

Applicants should describe the study site(s) and target population and provide a brief review of the relevant theories or research supporting the proposed approach. Applicants should describe any research or evaluation studies that relate to the need and contribute to the applicant’s understanding of its causes and potential solutions. While OJJDP expects applicants to review the research literature for relevant studies, they should also explore whether unpublished local sources of research or evaluation data are available.

(2) Project design and implementation. Applicants should provide a detailed description of the research design and methods, addressing the items noted on pages 6-7 of this solicitation. This includes detailed explanations of:

the sampling plan.

the human subjects considerations.

how the applicant will measure impact for the proposed research questions and why this is the best approach. Applicants should address recidivism/ reoffending and an analysis of the types of offenses, including violent offending, and may address other outcomes.

how the applicant will examine implementation, including the key programmatic or systemic components, theoretical foundation, and implementation quality.

the data sources, data collection tools, and data collection procedures.

the statistical and data analyses anticipated.

the anticipated limitations and barriers in the approach and project.

estimated costs and time lines of different research plans

Performance Measures. OJJDP does not require applicants to submit performance measures data with their applications. Performance measures (see Performance Measures, page 19) are included as an alert that OJJDP 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.

OJJDP encourages award recipients to use information from existing program records to fulfill performance measures reporting requirements rather than initiating new data collection activities for this purpose.

Logic model. Applicants should include a logic model that graphically illustrates the theory of change that the evaluation will measure. Sample logic models are available at www.ojjdp.gov/grantees/pm/logic_models.html. Applicants should submit the logic model as a separate attachment, as stipulated in Additional Attachments, page 22.

Timeline. Applicants should submit a realistic timeline or milestone chart that indicates major tasks associated with the goals and objectives of the project, assigns responsibility for each, and plots completion of each task by month or quarter for the duration of the award, using “Year 1,” “Month 1,” “Quarter 1,” etc., not calendar dates (see “Sample Project Timelines” here.) Applicants should submit the timeline as a separate attachment, as stipulated in Additional Attachments, page 22.

d. Potential impact. Applicants should describe the potential impact of the research and how it may inform or improve juvenile justice-related policy, practice, and theory in the United States. This includes a description of:

how the proposed research will inform the juvenile justice and child welfare systems’ coordination, policies, and practice.

how applicants will complete the deliverables stated in the Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables section on pages 6-11.

a plan for dissemination to broader audiences.

e. Capabilities/competencies. This section should describe the experience and capability of the…