Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 222 / Tuesday, November 18, 1997 / Notices 61549

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics; Hate

Crime Statistics Improvement Program

[OJP (BJS)–1144]

RIN 1121–ZA90

AGENCY: Bureau of Justice Statistics

(BJS), Office of Justice Programs (OJP),

Justice.

ACTION: Solicitation for award of

cooperative agreement.

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is

to announce a public solicitation for

services related to improving the

accuracy and geographic coverage of

hate crime statistics, developing trend

data with regard to hate crime statistics

and identifying ‘‘best practices’’

regarding the collection of hate crime

statistics.

DATES: Proposals must be postmarked

on or before December 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Proposals should be mailed

to: Application Coordinator, Bureau of

Justice Statistics, 810 7th Street, NW,

Suite 2400, Washington, DC 20531,

(202) 616–3500.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles R. Kindermann, Ph.D., Senior

Statistician, Bureau of Justice Statistics,

(202) 616–3489.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Crimes motivated by bias are

devastating because of their impact on

the victims and the polarizing effect that

such crimes have on a community.

Although many people believe that the

hate crime problem is increasing, the

statistical evidence for an increase is

very weak. More specifically, the

available statistical evidence

understates the incidence of hate crime

and does not provide valid indications

of trends. Obtaining accurate

information on the incidence of hate

crime is crucial to understanding the

full scope of the problem and effectively

deploying resources to combat it.

Currently, hate crime statistics are

compiled by the Federal Bureau of

Investigation (FBI) under the Uniform

Crime Reporting (UCR) program, which

itself relies on voluntarily reported data.

Little more than half the nation’s 16,000

UCR-participating law enforcement

agencies report hate crime data, and a

majority of those that do participate in

the FBI’s hate crime reporting program

indicate that each year their jurisdiction

experienced no hate crimes at all.

There are four points at which failures

in reporting can occur: victims reporting

to their local law enforcement agencies,

law enforcement officers recording the

fact that the reported incident is a hate

or bias crime, official determination that

the reported crime was indeed biasmotivated, and transmitting the

information from local law enforcement

agencies to the FBI’s UCR program.

These factors complicate the Attorney

General’s efforts to publish a meaningful

annual report on hate crimes under the

Hate Crime Statistics Act (HCSA). While

the HCSA does not specify any

particular method of data collection, the

Attorney General delegated the duty of

collecting hate crime statistics to the

Director of the FBI who, in turn,

assigned this responsibility to the FBI’s

UCR program. The FBI assembles the

information provided by state and local

agencies and annually publishes a

national hate crime statistics report

which is available from the FBI in

printed form on its website (http://

www.fbi.gov/ucr/hatecm.htm).

The FBI is gradually phasing in a

replacement for the summary UCR

program which is called the National

Incident-Based Reporting System

(NIBRS). Every incident reported in the

NIBRS program allows for an indicator

of whether or not it is a hate crime, so

widespread implementation of NIBRS

by law enforcement agencies is

currently viewed as an important

mechanism for enhancing hate crime

reporting.

Consistent with its role as the

statistical arm of the Justice Department

and its longstanding interest in hate

crime statistics, the Bureau of Justice

Statistics (BJS) is adding hate crime

questions to the National Crime

Victimization Survey (NCVS) to provide

a national estimate of the overall extent

of hate crimes. In addition, BJS has

developed this solicitation to learn more

about the impediments to local

jurisdictions’ participation in the

collection of hate crime statistics and

transmission of the statistics to the FBI

for compilation at the national level.

The work to be carried out under this

solicitation will be closely coordinated

with the FBI.

Objectives

The purpose of this award is to

develop and/or recommend

methodologies and procedures that will

improve the quality and accuracy of

hate crime statistics, to improve the

geographic coverage of hate crime

statistics, and to recommend procedures

that will result in reliable trend data.

Profiles of jurisdictions that currently

collect accurate hate crime statistics will

be developed that will result in ‘‘best

practices’’ models.

Type of Assistance

It is anticipated that assistance, in the

form of one cooperative agreement of up

to $100,000, will be awarded for a oneyear period of study.

Statutory Authority

The cooperative agreement to be

awarded pursuant to this solicitation

will be funded by the Bureau of Justice

Statistics consistent with its mandate as

set forth in 42 U.S.C. 3732.

Eligibility Requirements

Consistent with fiscal requirements of

the Department of Justice’s Office of

Justice Programs, both profit-making

and nonprofit organizations may apply

for funds. However, no fees may be

charged against the project by profitmaking organizations.

Scope of Work

The object of this solicitation is to

obtain a cost-effective research study

that will assist the federal government

in identifying activities to be

undertaken in the future towards the

goal of improving the accuracy and

reporting of hate crime statistics,

producing accurate trend data on hate

crime, and developing ‘‘best practices’’

models.

The applicant must specify a detailed

timetable for each task involved in the

project. The successful applicant’s

timetable will be reviewed by the BJS

grant monitor; after agreement on a final

timetable, all work must be completed

as scheduled.

The successful applicant must

convene an advisory group comprised of

representatives from a cross section of

the community (to include a

representative of victim advocates,

victims, law enforcement agencies,

government, business, education,

legislators). This group will meet

periodically throughout the course of

the project to review progress, give

advice, make recommendations for

follow-up and implementation of

research recommendations, and to

review the final report. Both BJS and the

FBI will provide key input to the

selection of membership on the group.

Staff work (including both

administrative support for meetings,

payment, and substantive drafting tasks)

for the group will be provided by the

recipient organization.

In addition, the applicant must

choose from the following tasks and

propose activities to accomplish the

tasks (not all listed tasks need be

included in the application):

1. Through the evaluation of current

hate crimes training programs,

recommend how they might be utilized
61550 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 222 / Tuesday, November 18, 1997 / Notices

or modified to improve the accuracy,

reliability, and geographic coverage of

hate crime statistics.

2. Evaluate the effectiveness of

existing training curricula or materials

that help law enforcement officers

recognize and report hate or biasmotivated crimes, and produce a

synthesized model incorporating the

best features of them based on

evaluations and other criteria stated in

the proposal.

3. Improve national estimates of the

incidence, type, and trends of hate

crimes, based on the UCR program as a

model (data to be aggregated from law

enforcement jurisdictions).

4. Evaluate the impact of incidentbased crime reporting systems (that

include a check box or similar item for

identifying each incident as biasmotivated or not) on the quality of hate

crime statistics.

5. Assess the status of hate crime

reporting in a stratified sample of law

enforcement agencies throughout the

country (the strata could include the

following: degree of urbanization,

geographic region, size of agency, and

hate crime reporting history). From this

assessment:

—Discuss and recommend steps to be

taken by law enforcement agencies to

produce quality hate crime statistics.

—Identify effective ‘‘screening’’ and

‘‘verification’’ procedures for first

identifying and then confirming the

bias motivation.

—Determine factors associated with

disparities in hate crime statistics

reporting.

—Identify impediments to hate crime

reporting at both the agency and the

individual officer levels.

6. Convene a focus group made up of

representatives of groups vulnerable to

hate crimes, relevant advocacy groups,

and hate crime victims who did not

report the crime to police, to ascertain

methods of improving hate crime

reporting.

7. Examine the relationship between

the characteristics of jurisdictions and

agencies (population size, regional

location, UCR crime rate, racial/ethnic

mix, age distribution, median income,

presence or absence of community

policing, etc.) and the level of reporting

of hate crime statistics.

8. Assess the circumstances that led

law enforcement agencies to develop

effective hate crimes programs, such as

whether there was a significant event, or

other factors, that resulted in

jurisdictions collecting accurate hate

crime statistics; or in what ways was the

adoption of such hate crime statistics

collection methods related to instituting

proactive efforts by the police to prevent

hate crime?

The recipient must produce a final

report for submission to the Bureau of

Justice Statistics which details the

study, and suggests methods of

improving the accuracy and geographic

coverage of hate crime statistics,

producing accurate trend data on hate

crime, and developing ‘‘best practices’’

models.

Suggested References

Bishop, Eric and Jeff Slowikowski.

‘‘Hate Crime.’’ Fact Sheet 29.

Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention,

U.S. Department of Justice. August,

1995.

Bureau of Justice Assistance. ‘‘A

Policymaker’s Guide to Hate Crimes.’’

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Justice. 1996.

Community Relations Service. ‘‘Hate

Crime: The Violence of Intolerance.’’

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Justice. 1997.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. ‘‘Hate

Crime Data Collection Guidelines.’’

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Justice. 1996.

Federal Bureau of Investigation.

‘‘Training Guide for Hate Crime Data

Collection.’’ Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Justice. 1997.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. ‘‘Hate

Crime Statistics, 1995.’’ Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996.

‘‘Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990,’’

Pub. L. 100–275 (104 Stat. 140). 1990.

Jacobs, James B. and Barry Eisler.

‘‘The Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990’’;

Criminal Law Bulletin. Warren Gorham

and Lamont. Boston, Massachusetts.

1993, p. 99–123.

Klanwatch, a Project of the Southern

Poverty Law Center. ‘‘The Dynamics of

Youth, Hate and Violence.’’ Klanwatch

Intelligence Report. Montgomery,

Alabama. October, 1995.

Levin, Jack and Jack McDevitt. ‘‘Hate

Crimes: The Rising Tide of Bigotry and

Bloodshed.’’ New York. Plenum Press.

1993.

Lieberman, Michael. ‘‘Federal Action

to Confront Hate Crimes: Preventing

Violence and Improving Police

Response.’’ New Challenges: The Civil

Rights Record of the Clinton

Administration Mid-Term. Washington,

D.C.: Citizens’ Commission on Civil

Rights. 1995. p. 217–229.

McLaughlin, Karen A. and Kelly J.

Brilliant. ‘‘Healing the Hate: A National

Bias Crime Prevention Curriculum for

Middle Schools.’’ Washington, D.C.:

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, U.S.

Department of Justice. 1997.

NGLTF Policy Institute. ‘‘Anti-Gay

and Lesbian Violence in 1994: National

Trends, Analysis, and Incident

Summaries.’’ Washington, D.C. 1991.

Nolan, J. & Y. Akiyama. ‘‘Assessing

the Factors That Affect Law

Enforcement Participation In Hate

Crime Reporting.’’ Washington, D.C.:

Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1997.

Office for Victims of Crime. ‘‘National

Bias Crimes Training for Law

Enforcement and Victim Assistance

Professionals: A Guide for Training

Instructors.’’ Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of Justice. 1995.

Award Procedures

Proposals should describe in detail

the procedures to be undertaken in

furtherance of each of the activities

described under Scope of Work. State by

number (as listed above) which tasks are

being included in the proposal and

provide a brief (several paragraphs)

introductory justification as to why

these tasks were chosen in furtherance

of the goals. Information on staffing

levels and qualifications should be

included for each task, and descriptions

of experience relevant to the project

should be included. Resumes of the

proposed project director and key staff

should be enclosed with the proposal.

Applications will be reviewed

competitively by a panel comprised of

members selected by BJS. The panel

will make recommendations to the

Director of BJS. Final authority to enter

into a cooperative agreement is reserved

for the Director of BJS or his designee.

Applications will be evaluated on the

overall extent to which selected tasks,

and the work performed on them, meet

the objectives of the solicitation;

respond to the priorities and technical

complexities of the issue of hate crime

reporting; specify work activities likely

to produce useful results; conform to

standards of high quality data analysis;

and are fiscally feasible and efficient.

Applicants will be evaluated on the

basis of:

—Knowledge of issues related to hate

crime data collection.

—Knowledge of issues related to the

Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and the

National Incident Based Reporting

System (NIBRS).

—Experience in organizing meetings of

Federal, state, or local professionals

related to criminal justice issues.

—Research expertise and experience in

data gathering and report writing.

—Availability of qualified professional

and support staff and suitable

equipment for project activities.

—Demonstrated fiscal, management and

organizational capability and

experience suitable for providing
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 222 / Tuesday, November 18, 1997 / Notices 61551

sound data within budget and time

constraints.

—Reasonableness of estimated costs for

the total project and for individual

cost categories.

Application and Awards Process

An original and two (2) copies of a

full proposal must be submitted with SF

424 (Rev. 1988), ‘‘Application for

Federal Assistance,’’ as the cover sheet.

Proposals must be accompanied by a

Budget Detail Worksheet (replaced the

SF 424A, Budget Information); OJP

Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1–93), Program

Narrative and Assurances’ OJP Form

4061/6, Certifications Regarding

Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and

Other Responsibility Matters; and DrugFree Workplace Requirements; and OJP

Form 7120–1 (Rev. 1–93), Accounting

System and Financial Capability

Questionnaire (to be submitted by

applicants who have not recently

received Federal funds from the Office

of Justice Programs and are not state or

local units of government). If

appropriate, applicants must complete

and submit Standard Form LLL,

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. All

applicants must sign Certified

Assurances that they are in compliance

with the Federal laws and regulations

which prohibit discrimination in any

program or activity the receives Federal

funds. To obtain appropriate forms,

contact Getha Hilario, BJS Management

Assistant, at (202) 616–3500.

The application should cover a oneyear period with information provided

for completion of the entire project.

Proposals must include a program

narrative, detailed budget, and budget

narrative. The program narrative shall

describe activities as stated in the scope

of work and address the evaluation

criteria. The detailed budget must

provide costs including salaries of staff

involved in the project and portion of

those salaries to be paid from the award;

fringe benefits paid to each staff person;

travel costs, and supplies required to

complete the project. The budget

narrative closely follows the content of

the detailed budget. The narrative

should relate the items budgeted to the

project activities and should provide a

justification and explanation for the

budgeted items. Refer to the

aforementioned timetable when

developing the program narrative and

budget information.

This award will not be used to

procure equipment for the conduct of

the study.

Dated: November 13, 1997.

Jan M. Chaiken,

Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

[FR Doc. 97–30271 Filed 11–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

Agency Information Collection

Activities: New Collection; Comment

Request

ACTION: Request OMB approval; The

Second National Incidence Studies of

Missing, Abducted, Runaway and

Thrownaway Children (NISMART 2).

The Office of Management and Budget

approval is being sought for the

information collection listed below.

This proposed information collection

was previously published in the Federal

Register on July 29, 1997 at 62 FR

40545, allowing for a 60-day public

comment period. No comments were

received by the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention. The

purpose of this notice is to allow an

additional 30 days for public comments.

Comments are encouraged and will be

accepted until December 18, 1997. This

process is conducted in accordance with

5 CFR 1320.

Written comments and/or suggestions

regarding the item(s) contained in this

notice, especially regarding the

estimated public burden and associated

response time, should be directed to the

Office of Management and Budget,

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Attention: Ms. Victoria

Wassmer, 202–395–5871, Department of

Justice Desk Officer, Room 10202,

Washington, DC 20503. Additionally,

comments may be submitted to OMB via

facsimile to 202–395–7285. Comments

may also be submitted to the

Department of Justice (DOJ), Justice

Management Division, Information

Management and Security Staff,

Attention: Department Clearance

Officer, Suite 850, 1001 G Street, N.W.,

Washington, DC 20530. Comments may

also be submitted to DOJ via facsimile

to 202–514–1534.

Written comments and suggestions

from the public and affected agencies

concerning the proposed collection of

information should address one or more

of the following four points.

(1) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated,

electronic, mechanical, or other

technical collection techniques or other

forms of information technology, e.g.,

permitting electronic submission of

response.

Overview of this information

collection:

(1) Type of Information Collection:

New Collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: The

Second National Incidence Studies of

Missing, Abducted, Runaways and

Thrownaway Children (NISMART 2).

(3) Agency form number, if any, and

the applicable component of the

Department of Justice sponsoring the

collection: None; Applicable component

of the Department of Justice sponsoring

the collection: Department of Justice

(DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP),

Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP).

(4) Affected public who will be asked

or required to respond, as well as a brief

abstract: Primary: Individuals or

households, Other: State, local, tribal

governments; Not for profit.

Abstract: Pursuant to the Missing

Children’s Assistance Act, Title IV,

section 404(b)(3) of the Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention Act 1974,

as amended 42 U.S.C. 5773(b)(3), OJJDP

is required to conduct periodic studies

of the incidence of missing children.

The purpose of these studies is to

develop reliable and valid statistics on

the incidence of children who are

missing, abducted, runaways, or

thrownaway in the course of a given

year, as well as the number of these

children who are recovered.

(5) An estimate of the total number of

respondents and the amount of time

estimated for an average respondent to

respond: 75,000 respondents at 2.5

minutes per response; 22,000

respondents at 20 minutes per response;

9500 respondents at 10 minutes per

response; 2500 respondents at 45

minutes per response; 50 respondents at

16 hours per response.

(6) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the

collection: 14,716 burden hours.

If additional information is required

contact: Mr. Robert Briggs, Clearance

Officer, United States Department of