[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 74 (Monday, April 17, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20460-20465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9419]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary, Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation


Notice Inviting Applications for Enhancements of Welfare Outcomes 
Research for Fiscal Year 2000

AGENCY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services.

ACTION: Announcement of the availability of funds and request for 
applications from States and large counties that propose to enhance 
current research and monitoring efforts regarding key outcomes related 
to welfare reform.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation (ASPE) announces the availability of funds and invites 
States and large counties to propose enhancements to existing welfare 
outcome data collection efforts. ASPE anticipates that approximately 
four to six States or large counties will receive funding. ASPE is 
interested in funding only those applicants who propose enhancements 
that fill knowledge gaps that can not be filled by their existing data 
collection efforts. These knowledge gaps could pertain to populations 
who have had direct contact with the welfare system as well as other 
low-income populations that may be indirectly affected by welfare 
reform. Enhancements may focus on issues such as sample size, data 
collection period, content and depth of data, as well as validity and 
representativeness of data. Eligible applicants may include both States 
and counties that have previously received grants from ASPE to study 
welfare outcomes, as well as those who have not received funding from 
ASPE previously.

CLOSING DATE: The closing date for submitting abstracts under this 
announcement is June 1, 2000.

MAILING ADDRESS: Application instructions and forms should be requested 
from and submitted to: Adrienne Little, Grants Officer, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health 
and Human Services, Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 
Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20201. Telephone: (202) 690-
8794. Requests for forms and administrative questions will be accepted 
and responded to up to ten (10) working days prior to the closing date.
    Copies of this program announcement and many of the required forms 
may also be obtained electronically at the ASPE World Wide Web Page: 
http://aspe.hhs.gov, under the title ``Funding.'' You may fax your 
request to the attention of the Grants Officer at (202) 690-6518. 
Applications may not be faxed or submitted electronically.
    The printed Federal Register notice is the only official program 
announcement. Although reasonable efforts are taken to assure that the 
files on the ASPE World Wide Web Page containing electronic copies of 
this program announcement are accurate and complete, they are provided 
for information only. The applicant bears sole responsibility to assure 
that the copy downloaded and/or printed from any other source is 
accurate and complete.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Grant administrative questions should 
be directed to the Grants Officer at the address or phone number listed 
above. Technical/program questions should be directed to Kelleen Kaye, 
DHHS, ASPE, Room 404E, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence 
Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20201. Telephone: (202) 401-6634. 
Questions may be faxed to (202) 690-6562 or e-mailed to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ee85858f978bae819d8f9d9e8bc08a86869dc0898198"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d66666c74684d627e6c7e7d68236965657e236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>. Technical questions will be accepted and 
responded to up to ten (10) working days prior to the closing date.

Supplementary Information:

Part I

Legislative Authority

    This announcement is authorized by Section 1110 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1310) and awards will be made from funds 
appropriated under the Department of Health and Human Services 
Appropriations Act, 2000, by section 1000(a)(4) of the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113).

Eligible Applicants

    For studies of populations having direct contact with the TANF 
system, ASPE will consider applications only from State agencies that 
administer TANF programs, and county agencies that administer TANF 
programs and have total populations greater than 500,000. Additionally, 
for studies of welfare related outcomes among the low-income population 
more generally, other State agencies may apply and are encouraged to 
coordinate and/or consult with the TANF administrative agencies in 
preparing their proposal and undertaking their research. Consortia of 
States and counties are also encouraged to apply, as long as their 
combined total populations exceed 500,000 and a single agency is 
identified as the lead to handle grant funds and sub-granting. Public 
or private nonprofit organizations, including universities and other 
institutions of higher education, may collaborate with States in 
submitting an application, but the principal grantee will be the State 
or county. Private for-profit organizations may also apply jointly with 
States, with the recognition that grant funds may not be paid as profit 
to any recipient of a grant or subgrant. Eligible applications must 
build on existing survey data collection or administrative data linking 
capacity around welfare related outcomes and must propose significant 
enhancements beyond current efforts. Eligible applicants may include 
both States and counties that have previously received grants from ASPE 
to study welfare outcomes, as well as those who have not received 
funding from ASPE previously.
    The Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 92 defines a State 
as: ``Any of the several States of the United States, the District of 
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession 
of the United States, or any agency or instrumentality of a State 
exclusive of local governments. The term does not include

[[Page 20461]]

any public and Indian housing agency under United States Housing Act of 
1937.''

Available Funds

    Approximately $1,000,000 is available from ASPE, in funds 
appropriated for fiscal year 2000. ASPE anticipates providing 
approximately four to six awards of between $150,000 and $200,000 each. 
If additional funding becomes available in fiscal years 2000 or 2001, 
further projects may be funded. Applications for funding under this 
announcement should describe projects that can be completely carried 
out with one year of funding at the above anticipated level.

Use of Funds

    No federal funds received as a result of this announcement can be 
used to purchase computer equipment and no funds may be paid to 
grantees or subgrantees as profit, i.e., any amount in excess of 
allowable direct and indirect costs of the recipient (45 CFR 74.81). 
Our intent is to sponsor enhancements to data collection efforts, and 
grant funds awarded may not be used to pay for assistance programs or 
the provision of services.
    Grantees must provide at least five percent of the total approved 
cost of the project. The total approved cost of the project is the sum 
of the Federal share and the non-Federal share. Thus, a project with a 
total budget of $200,000 must include a match of at least $10,000 and 
would imply a request for Federal funds of no more than $190,000. The 
non-Federal share may be met by cash or in-kind contributions, although 
applicants are encouraged to meet their match requirements through cash 
contributions.
    If a proposed project activity has approved funding support from 
other funding sources, the amount, duration, purpose, and source of the 
funds should be indicated in materials submitted under this 
announcement. If completion of the proposed project activity is 
contingent upon approval of funding from other sources, the 
relationship between the funds being sought elsewhere and from ASPE 
should be discussed in the budget information submitted as a part of 
the proposal. In both cases, the contribution that ASPE funds will make 
to the project should be clearly presented.

Background

    Since January 1993, the number of people receiving federally funded 
assistance under Title IV-A of the Social Security Act has fallen from 
14.1 million to just under 7 million recipients, a reduction of 51 
percent. This decline has occurred in response to several factors, 
including the Administration's grants of Federal waivers to 43 States, 
the provisions of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193), and the strong economy. In 
response to the demand from the public and policymakers, many studies 
have been and are currently being carried out to study the 
circumstances of the large numbers of people who have left welfare or 
who applied and were formally or informally diverted from welfare.
    In fiscal year 1998, ASPE awarded approximately $2.9 million in 
grants to state and county TANF agencies to study the outcomes of 
welfare reform for individuals and families who leave the TANF program 
and who apply for cash welfare but are never enrolled (``divertees''). 
Most of the 1998 grants focused on welfare leavers. In fiscal year 
1999, ASPE awarded an additional $2.6 million in grants to state and 
county agencies to study welfare outcomes, including $1.8 million in 
grants for new projects (primarily focusing on welfare applicants and 
diversion) and $0.8 million in continuation grants for selected 
projects funded in 1998. All grants funded in 1998 and 1999 used a 
combination of administrative and survey data to monitor the economic 
and general well-being of families applying for, entering, or leaving 
the TANF program. Earlier grants to states and counties, provided in 
fiscal years 1996 and 1997, had focused on linking administrative 
databases in order to study program interactions. In addition, a number 
of states and localities have funded their own studies of welfare 
outcomes.
    ASPE and the Administration for Children and Families, as well as 
individual States, have also funded a large number of welfare reform 
evaluations, including continuations of evaluations that began under 
waivers and use random assignment to address the effects of alternative 
welfare reform programs.
    Through these various projects, State and local grantees have 
improved their ability to conduct research on welfare outcomes. 
Valuable information has been gained about the condition of many low-
income families affected by welfare reform. For example, between 50 and 
65 percent of single-parent adults leaving TANF were employed in 
industries covered by unemployment insurance immediately after leaving 
TANF, according to a review of interim reports from ASPE-funded 
studies. One year after exit, between 15 and 30 percent of TANF leavers 
were back on assistance, according to this same review of 
administrative data studies. Participation rates in Medicaid, food 
stamps and other government programs varied across the states, but were 
generally lower than expected. Survey data findings, from the ASPE-
funded studies and other state and national projects, provide 
additional information on such topics as household income, barriers to 
employment, family and child well-being, and other outcomes that cannot 
be measured through administrative data alone. Additional information 
on ASPE funded welfare outcomes studies can be found on the ASPE 
website at <a href="http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/leavers99/index.htm">aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/leavers99/index.htm</a>
    As findings from these studies emerge and form a valuable knowledge 
base around welfare outcomes, now is an appropriate time to identify 
the remaining gaps in knowledge and the enhancements in data collection 
that could help fill these gaps.

Part II. Purpose

    ASPE is committed to using the research funds appropriated by 
Congress to help States and localities build on what they have learned 
thus far and enhance their ability to studying welfare outcomes.
    The purpose of this announcement is to assist the efforts of States 
and large counties to implement enhancements to their existing data 
gathering efforts regarding welfare reform outcomes. These enhancements 
would help States and/or large counties fill important knowledge gaps 
regarding welfare outcomes that are difficult to address using their 
current data. This includes outcomes for families coming in direct 
contact with the welfare system, as well as the low income population 
that may be indirectly affected by welfare reform.
    An applicant should clearly describe the research questions they 
propose to answer and their importance for understanding the effects of 
welfare reform, the existing data collection efforts on which the 
proposed research will build, their current difficulties in answering 
the question of interest, and how the enhancements they propose will 
help them overcome these difficulties. The focus is on expanding the 
richness and reliability of data available in welfare outcomes 
research, and proposals focusing primarily on secondary analysis of 
existing data will not be funded under this announcement.
    Priority will be given to those applicants who propose enhancements 
to ongoing survey data collection efforts. However, applications 
proposing

[[Page 20462]]

enhancements to linked administrative data will be considered, provided 
they can demonstrate an existing capability to link across data systems 
and/or over time, and propose significant and innovative improvements 
beyond their current efforts.
    Linking to additional program data or linking over a longer period 
of time would not be considered an improvement unless the additional 
information would add an important dimension not currently available in 
the existing linked data. Examples of such improvements include a) 
linking to nonprogrammatic administrative data systems, such as school 
records, whose primary focus would be broader than program 
participation and would help provide information on other household 
members; and b) linking administrative records over time in a way that 
allows the tracking of family characteristics and outcomes through 
multiple benefit situations, e.g. prior to welfare receipt, during 
receipt, and after exiting.
    There is a great degree of variation in State programs, in the 
scope of State data collection efforts, the knowledge gaps identified, 
and the enhancements States propose to fill those gaps. Examples of 
possible knowledge gaps and several associated enhancements are 
highlighted below. These examples are illustrative. Applicants may 
focus on other knowledge gaps and enhancements. Enhancements may 
address issues such as sample size, data collection period, content and 
depth of data, as well as validity and representativeness of data.
    <bullet> How are former recipients who are neither employed nor 
receiving benefits faring? These former recipients are likely to be 
more transient than other welfare leavers. Research around their 
outcomes could benefit from using methods to track them more 
effectively and from developing outcome measures that better capture 
their well-being when there are no visible means of income. Outcome 
measures that cover the entire household will be particularly important 
for this population, given that many may have moved in with other 
household members, doubling up or cohabiting.
    <bullet> What can we learn about the well-being and experiences of 
low-income families who choose not to participate in welfare? In many 
cases, the influences of welfare reform reach beyond welfare recipients 
to the low-income population more generally. More information is needed 
about why many potentially eligible families choose not to participate, 
whether they have had any contact with the welfare system, and how they 
are faring. To better understand this population, efforts are needed 
that build on data sources covering more than welfare recipients.
    <bullet> Do survey nonrespondents tend to differ on important 
outcomes, and what do their characteristics imply for the 
representativeness of existing survey results on welfare outcomes? 
Nonrespondents are comprised of those who decline to answer the survey, 
as well as those who could not be located. In some cases, those who 
could not be located can represent a unique population facing 
particularly difficult circumstances, and not including them in the 
sample can bias the findings on welfare outcomes. To find 
nonrespondents and better understand their outcomes and 
characteristics, it is often necessary to implement intensive location 
and follow-up procedures.
    <bullet> How do outcomes differ among various subgroups within the 
population being analyzed? Our understanding of subgroup differences 
could benefit from analysis that not only contrasts by demographic 
characteristics (e.g. ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, 
families with children of differing ages, immigrants, rural vs. urban 
residents, substance abusers), but also by different types of cases 
(e.g. among leavers, an applicant could propose to contrast closures 
due to earnings, sanctions and time limits). Subgroup analysis would 
need data that identifies the characteristic of interest, and that 
contains a sufficient number of observations within each subgroup.
    <bullet> How do welfare related outcomes change over time? To 
improve measures of longitudinal outcomes, more waves could be added to 
existing survey data to follow a current cohort over a longer period of 
time, or administrative data could be linked longitudinally to follow 
clients through multiple benefit situations.
    <bullet> Can improvements be made to measures that focus beyond the 
principal respondent and cover the household more broadly? For example, 
measures of household income could be improved by including data that 
can be summed across individuals and across income sources to better 
approximate total household income. Measures of child outcomes could be 
improved by providing better measures of instability inside and outside 
the family and covering a more detailed set of outcomes, such as school 
outcomes, cognitive development, social behaviors/activities/problems, 
mental health, and the extent of resident and non-resident parent 
involvement. Monitoring changes in household composition could also be 
an important aspect of assessing welfare outcomes for the household.
    Applicants are free to identify other knowledge gaps which they 
believe could be better addressed through enhancements to their 
existing data collection efforts. Regardless of the knowledge gap being 
addressed or the enhancement being implemented, an applicant proposing 
to improve research around welfare related outcomes should consider not 
only the richness, but also the representativeness and validity of the 
survey and/or linked administrative data they will use.

Part III. Grantee Responsibilities

    1. No later than ten (10) months after the date of the award, the 
grantee shall plan to meet in Washington DC with Federal staff to 
present and discuss preliminary findings, their plan for the final 
report, and their efforts to produce and document a public use data 
file or other efforts to make the resulting data publically available.
    2. After completing the analysis, the grantee shall prepare a final 
report describing the results of the study, including the procedures 
and methodology used to conduct the analysis, their findings as they 
relate to the research questions being proposed, and any barriers 
encountered in completing the project. A draft of this report shall be 
delivered to the Federal Project Officer no later than thirty (30) days 
before the completion of the project. After receiving comments on the 
draft report from the Federal Project Officer, the grantee shall 
deliver at least three (3) copies of a final report to the Grants 
Officer before the completion of the project. One of these copies must 
be unbound, suitable for photocopying; if only one is the original (has 
the original signature, is attached to a cover letter, etc.), it should 
not be this copy.
    3. To encourage wider analysis, the grantee shall document and make 
available all data to the research community. ASPE prefers that this 
result in a public-use data file. In preparing the public-use data 
file, data shall be edited as appropriate to ensure confidentiality of 
individuals. The data file and documentation shall be delivered to the 
Federal Project Officer prior to completion of the project. If the 
applicant feels that provision of a public-use data file is impossible, 
the application should explain why and should fully articulate how the 
applicant will make the data available to qualified researchers and to 
ASPE by other means. In either case, the grantee shall the plan for 
data dissemination will be evaluated and scored during the evaluation 
of proposals.

[[Page 20463]]

    4. To encourage dissemination of their findings, the grantee shall 
present their results at one national or regional research conference 
of their choosing during the year. The grantee shall submit and discuss 
with the Federal Project Officer any materials they plan to present two 
weeks prior to the conference.

Part IV. Application Preparation and Evaluation Criteria

    This section contains information on the preparation of 
applications for submission under this announcement, the forms 
necessary for submission, and the evaluation criteria under which the 
applications will be reviewed. Potential grant applicants should read 
this section carefully in conjunction with the information provided 
above.

Application Preparation

    The application must contain the required Federal forms, title 
page, table of contents, and sections listed below. The narrative shall 
not exceed 25 single spaced pages and all pages of the narrative should 
be numbered. Applications from States and counties that received 
funding from ASPE under the FY 1998 or 1999 welfare outcomes grants are 
not precluded from submitting proposals under this announcement, 
provided they are proposing meaningful enhancements to their current 
efforts data collection efforts. However, such proposals will be graded 
only on the Evaluation Criteria listed below and will receive no 
preferential treatment during the award process.
    The narrative should include the following elements:
    1. Abstract: A one page summary of the proposed project.
    2. Goals and objectives of the project: An overview that briefly 
describes (1) the specific knowledge gaps to be investigated by the 
applicant and their importance to welfare reform; (2) how the proposed 
enhancements would fill these knowledge gaps in a way that could not be 
done using existing data. The narrative should describe how funding 
under this announcement will enhance, not substitute for, existing 
State or local efforts.
    3. Research Design: Provide a description and justification of how 
the proposed research project will be implemented, including definition 
of study populations, use of existing data sources, data collection 
activities, methodologies and the type of results that are anticipated. 
This discussion should:
    (a) Provide a concise description of any existing research efforts 
on which the proposed project will build. Lengthy documentation is 
unnecessary, but the discussion should provide enough detail to (1) 
Demonstrate an existing capacity regarding survey and/or linked 
administrative data collection efforts with respect to welfare outcomes 
or low income populations, including a description of the population 
and data period covered and any outcomes measures that are relevant to 
the proposal; and (2) describe, in terms of the richness, 
representativeness and/or validity of the data, why the current effort 
cannot fully answer the research questions posed above. The applicant 
should clearly identify how the study population is defined. To the 
extent they are focusing on recipients leaving TANF, applicants are 
strongly encouraged to use the ``leaving cash assistance for two months 
or longer'' definition, agreed to by the earlier ASPE-funded grantees.
    (b) Describe in detail the data enhancement being proposed with 
respect to collection of welfare outcomes data, how it would build on 
the existing data collection efforts to answer the research questions 
proposed in the application, and how such enhancements to data 
collection would be implemented. The applicant should discuss the 
extent to which the enhancement will improve their existing data on 
welfare related outcomes, including any proposed changes in population, 
additional data sources, additional outcomes, and how the enhancements 
will improve data validity and/or representativeness. With respect to 
existing and proposed survey data, this should include a discussion of 
sample design, sample size, survey mode and response rates. With 
respect to existing and proposed linked administrative data, this 
should include a discussion of what data systems are linked, how the 
records were matched, what match rate was achieved and any internal 
validity checks. We encourage applicants to consider using 
probabilistic matching, which examines several variables and then 
factors in the probability that two records with different identifiers 
actually represent the same person.
    (c) Identify the methodology the applicant will use to analyze the 
data and organize the final report. Complex data analysis is neither 
expected nor preferred. Simple tabular analysis, descriptive statistics 
and associated tests for statistical significance are appropriate. The 
description should include specific analyses and tabulations planned, 
how the results will be presented, and organization of the report. 
Final results should include a tabulation showing the characteristics 
of sample members who are not included in the analysis, either due to 
nonresponse in survey data or due to records that cannot be matched in 
administrative data, and should discuss any implications regarding the 
representativeness of their data.
    (d) To the extent that the analysis uses data on individuals from 
multiple, separate sources, such as administrative databases from 
several State agencies, the proposal should discuss measures taken to 
maintain confidentiality. Grant applicants must ensure that the 
collected data will only be used for management and research purposes, 
and that all identifying information will be kept completely 
confidential, and should present the methods that will be used to 
ensure confidentiality of records and information once data are made 
publically available for research purposes.
    4. Experience, capacity, qualifications, and use of staff: Briefly 
describe the grant applicant's organizational capabilities and 
experience in conducting pertinent research projects.
    (a) The proposal should describe in detail the applicant's and/or 
key subcontractors' experience with issues regarding the collection and 
use of survey data and linking administrative data to the extent these 
are relevant to the proposal. If the grant applicant plans to contract 
for any of the work (e.g., data-linking, survey design or 
administration), and the contractors have not been retained, the 
applicant should describe the process by which they will be selected.
    (b) The applicant should identify the key staff who are expected to 
carry out the project, provide as an attachment a resume or curriculum 
vitae for each key staff member, and provide a discussion of how key 
staff will contribute to the success of the project, including the 
percentage of each staff member's time that will be devoted to the 
project and their relevant expertise.
    (c) Finally, applicants should include, in an attachment, 
documentation showing authorized access to data proposed for the 
project and to computer hardware and software for storing and analyzing 
the data. As proof of access to data, it is preferred that applicants 
provide a signed interagency agreement with each of the relevant 
agencies/departments. Though not preferable, letters of support from 
the appropriate agencies are acceptable, provided that the letter 
clearly states that the proposing agency has the authorization to 
access and link all necessary data.

[[Page 20464]]

    5. Work plan: A work plan should discuss the start and end dates of 
the project, a time line which indicates the sequence and timing of 
tasks necessary for the completion of the project, the responsibilities 
of each of the key staff, and any interaction with tasks of the 
existing research effort. In listing the sequence of tasks, the plan 
should provide sufficient detail to demonstrate the applicant has 
carefully thought through the necessary steps to complete the project. 
The plan should identify the total time commitments of key staff 
members in both absolute and percentage terms, including other projects 
and teaching or managerial responsibilities.
    The work plan also should include plans for dissemination of the 
results of the study (e.g., articles in journals, presentations to 
State legislatures or at conferences). As noted above, ASPE prefers 
that the data be edited as appropriate for confidentiality and issued 
as a public-use data file. The work plan should detail how resulting 
data and analysis will be made available to qualified researchers and 
to ASPE. If the grant applicant believes that provision of a public-use 
file would be impossible, the application should explain why and should 
fully articulate how the applicant will make the data available to 
qualified researchers and to ASPE.
    6. Budget: Grant applicants must submit a request for federal funds 
using Standard Form 424A and include a detailed breakdown of all 
Federal line items. A narrative explanation of the budget should be 
included that states clearly how the funds associated with this 
announcement will be used and demonstrates that funds will be used for 
purposes that would not otherwise be incorporated within the project. 
The applicant should also discuss how these funds will fit into a total 
budget that combines funding from other sources, and how funds from 
other sources will be expended.
    All applicants must budget for two trips. One trip should be 
budgeted for up to three staff members to travel to Washington, DC. At 
this meeting, grantees will have the opportunity to present their 
preliminary findings and discuss the format of their final report with 
Federal staff. A second trip should be budgeted for one staff member to 
travel to a national or regional research conference of their choosing 
to present their research findings.

Review Process and Funding Information

    Applications will be screened initially for compliance with the 
timeliness and completeness requirements. Three (3) copies of each 
application are required. One of these copies must be in an unbound 
format, suitable for copying. If only one of the copies is the original 
(i.e., carries the original signature and is accompanied by a cover 
letter) it should not be this copy. Applicants are encouraged to send 
an additional four (4) copies to ease processing, but the application 
will not be penalized if these extra copies are not included. The grant 
applicant's Standard Form 424 must be signed by a representative of the 
applicant who is authorized to act with full authority on behalf of the 
applicant.
    A Federal review panel will review and score all applications 
submitted by the deadline date that meet the screening criteria (all 
information and documents as required by this announcement.) The panel 
will use the evaluation criteria listed below to score each 
application. The panel results will be the primary element used by the 
ASPE when making funding decisions. The Department reserves the option 
to discuss applications with other Federal or State staff, specialists, 
experts and the general public. Comments from these sources, along with 
those of the reviewers, will be kept from inappropriate disclosure. 
These comments, along with the goal of funding research on a variety of 
topics, may be considered in making an award decision.
    As a result of this competition, approximately four to six grants 
of $150,000 to $200,000 each are expected to be made from funds 
appropriated for fiscal year 2000. Additional awards may be made 
depending on the policy relevance of proposals received and the 
available funding, including funds that may become available in fiscal 
years 2000 or 2001.

State Single Point of Contact (E.O. No. 12372)

    DHHS has determined that this program is not subject to Executive 
Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.'' 
Applicants are not required to seek intergovernmental review of their 
applications within the constraints of E.O. 12372.

Deadline for Submission of Applications

    The closing date for submission of applications under this 
announcement is June 1, 2000. Hand-delivered applications will be 
accepted Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, during the 
working hours of 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in the lobby of the Hubert H. 
Humphrey building, located at 200 Independence Avenue, SW in 
Washington, DC. When hand-delivering an application, call (202) 690-
8794 from the lobby for pick up. A staff person will be available to 
receive applications.
    An application will be considered as having met the deadline if it 
is either received at, or hand-delivered to, the mailing address on or 
before June 1, 2000, or postmarked before midnight three days prior to 
June 1, 2000 and received in time to be considered during the 
competitive review process.
    When mailing applications, applicants are strongly advised to 
obtain a legibly dated receipt from the U.S. Postal Service or from a 
commercial carrier (such as UPS, Federal Express, etc.) as proof of 
mailing by the deadline. If there is a question as to when an 
application was mailed, applicants will be asked to provide proof of 
mailing by the deadline. If proof cannot be provided, the application 
will not be considered for funding. Private metered postmarks will not 
be accepted as proof of timely mailing. Applications which do not meet 
the deadline will be considered late applications and will not be 
considered or reviewed in the current competition. DHHS will send a 
letter to this effect to each late applicant.
    DHHS reserves the right to extend the deadline for all proposals 
due to: (1) Natural disasters, such as floods, hurricanes, or 
earthquakes; (2) a widespread disruption of the mail; or, (3) if DHHS 
determines a deadline extension to be in the best interest of the 
Federal government. The Department will not waive or extend the 
deadline for any applicant unless the deadline is waived or extended 
for all applicants.

Length of Application

    In no case shall an application for the ASPE grant (excluding the 
resumes, appendices and other appropriate attachments) be longer than 
twenty-five (25) single-spaced pages, with 12 point font and one inch 
margins on top, bottom, right and left. Applications should not be 
unduly elaborate, but should fully communicate the applicant's proposal 
to the reviewers.

Selection Process and Evaluation Criteria

    Selection of successful applicants will be based on the technical 
and financial criteria described in this announcement. The point value 
following each criterion heading indicates the maximum numerical weight 
that each section will be given in the review process. An unacceptable 
rating on any individual criterion may render the application 
unacceptable. Consequently, grant

[[Page 20465]]

applicants should take care to ensure that all criteria are fully 
addressed in the applications. Grant applications will be reviewed as 
follows:
    1. Goals, Objectives, and Potential Usefulness of the Analyses (25 
points). The potential usefulness of the objectives and how the 
anticipated results of the proposed project will fill critical gaps in 
knowledge around welfare related outcomes that cannot be answered with 
existing data. Applications will be judged on the quality and policy 
relevance of the proposed research questions, appropriateness of study 
populations, and the usefulness of the analyses.
    2. Quality and Soundness of Research Design (35 points). The 
appropriateness, soundness, and cost-effectiveness of the proposed 
research design, including data gathering techniques, selection of 
existing data sets, definition of study populations, statistical 
techniques and type of results that are anticipated. In particular, the 
applicant should address the following, as described under the section 
on Application Preparation.
    (a) The applicant must describe the existing survey and/or linked 
administrative data effort around welfare outcomes or the low-income 
population on which the proposed enhancements will build, including a 
description of why the current effort cannot fully answer the research 
questions posed above.
    (b) The applicant should describe in detail the data enhancement 
being proposed with respect to welfare outcomes research, how it would 
build on the existing data collection efforts to answer the research 
questions proposed in the application, and how such enhancements to 
data collection would be implemented. There is a preference for 
enhancements to survey data, but enhancements to linked administrative 
data that are significant and innovative will be considered.
    (c) The applicant should also describe their proposed data 
analysis, including the proposed tabulations and table shells and the 
planned organization of the final report. Applicant should plan to 
include in their final results a tabulation showing the basic 
characteristics of sample members who were not included in the final 
analysis, including any available outcome measures, and should discuss 
any implications regarding the representativeness of their data.
    (d) To the extent that the analysis uses data on individuals from 
multiple, separate sources, such as administrative databases from 
several State agencies, the reviewers will also evaluate whether the 
applicant has adequately discussed measures taken to maintain 
confidentiality.
    3. Qualifications of Personnel and Organizational Capability. (20 
points). The qualifications of the project personnel for conducting the 
proposed research as evidenced by professional training and experience, 
and the capacity of the organization to provide the infrastructure and 
support necessary for the project. This should include providing 
resumes or curriculum vitae for key staff members and demonstrating 
access to data, computer hardware to store the data and software to 
analyze the data, as described above under Application Preparation.
    4. Ability of the Work Plan and Budget to Successfully Achieve the 
Project's Objectives. (20 points). Reviewers will examine (a) if the 
work plan and budget are reasonable and sufficient to ensure timely 
completion of the study; (b) whether the application demonstrates an 
adequate level of understanding regarding the practical problems of 
conducting such a project; (c) the use of any additional funding and 
the role that ASPE funds would play in the total project; (d) whether 
the applicant has shown how results will be disseminated and resulting 
data will be made available to ASPE and qualified researchers. The 
preparation and documentation of a public use data file, or other 
efforts to make the resulting data publically available should be 
accounted for in the project budget.

Disposition of Applications

    1. Approval, disapproval, or deferral. On the basis of the review 
of the application, the Assistant Secretary will either (a) approve the 
application as a whole or in part; (b) disapprove the application; or 
(c) defer action on the application for such reasons as lack of funds 
or a need for further review.
    2. Notification of disposition. The Grant Officer will notify the 
applicants of the disposition of their applications. If approved, a 
signed notification of the award will be sent to the business office 
named in the ASPE checklist.
    3. The Assistant Secretary's Discretion. Nothing in this 
announcement should be construed as to obligate the Assistant Secretary 
for Planning and Evaluation to make any awards whatsoever. Awards are 
contingent on the needs of the policy and research communities as 
identified by the Department at any point in time, and on the quality 
of the applications that are received.
    The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number is 93-239.

Components of a Complete Application

    A complete application consists of the following items in this 
order:
    1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424);
    2. Budget Information--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 
424A);
    3. Assurances--Non-construction Programs (Standard From 424B);
    4. Table of Contents;
    5. Budget Justification for Section B Budget Categories;
    6. Proof of Non-profit Status, if appropriate;
    7. Copy of the applicant's Approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement, 
if necessary;
    8. Project Narrative Statement, organized in five sections, 
addressing the following topics (limited to twenty (25) single-spaced 
pages):
    (a) Abstract,
    (b) Goals, Objectives and Usefulness of the Project,
    (c) Research Design,
    (d) Background of the Personnel and Organizational Capabilities and
    (e) Work plan (timetable);
    9. Any appendices or attachments;
    10. Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace;
    11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, or other 
Responsibility Matters;
    12. Certification and, if necessary, Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;
    13. Supplement to Section II--Key Personnel;
    14. Application for Federal Assistance Checklist.

    Dated: April 10, 2000.
Ann M. Segal,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation for Policy 
Initiatives.
[FR Doc. 00-9419 Filed 4-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4154-05-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>