72510 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE 

Grant Guideline 

AGENCY: State Justice Institute. 

ACTION: Final Grant Guideline. 

SUMMARY: This Guideline sets forth the 

administrative, programmatic, and 

financial requirements attendant to 

Fiscal Year 2006 State Justice Institute 

grants, cooperative agreements, and 

contracts. 

DATES: December 5, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Linskey, Executive Director, State 

Justice Institute, 1650 King St. (Suite 

600), Alexandria, VA 22314, (703) 684– 

6100 X214. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the State Justice Institute Act of 1984, 

42 U.S.C. 10701, et seq., as amended, 

the Institute is authorized to award 

grants, cooperative agreements, and 

contracts to State and local courts, 

nonprofit organizations, and others for 

the purpose of improving the quality of 

justice in the State courts of the United 

States. 

The fiscal year 2006 Science, State, 

Justice, and Commerce appropriations 

subcommittee conference report (H. 

Rept. 109–272/H.R. 2862) made 

available $3.5 million for the State 

Justice Institute (SJI), less a modest 

across-the-board rescission. 

The Institute’s Board of Directors 

intends to solicit project grant 

applications for certain strategic 

priorities, discussed further below, to 

invite selected applicants to apply for 

grants in key areas, and to continue the 

most important project grants currently 

assisting courts nationwide. 

Types of Grants Available and Funding 

Schedules 

SJI is offering six types of grants in FY 

2006: Project Grants, Continuation 

Grants, Technical Assistance (TA) 

Grants, Judicial Branch Education 

Technical Assistance (JBE TA) grants, 

Scholarships, and Partner Grants. 

Project Grants. Project Grants (see 

sections II.B., III.O., V.B.1., VI.A., 

VII.B.1., and VIII.A.) are intended to 

support innovative education, research, 

demonstration, and technical assistance 

projects that can improve the 

administration of justice in State courts 

nationwide. As provided in section 

III.N. of the Guideline, Project Grants 

may ordinarily not exceed $300,000; 

however, grants in excess of $200,000 

are likely to be rare, and awarded only 

to support projects likely to have a 

significant national impact. 

The deadline for submitting a Project 

Grant application is February 13, 2006. 

The Board of Directors will meet in May 

2006 to approve grant awards. See 

section VI. for Project Grant application 

procedures. 

Applicants for Project Grants will be 

required to contribute a cash match of 

not less than 50% of the total cost of the 

proposed project. In other words, grant 

awards by SJI must be matched at least 

dollar for dollar by grant applicants. 

Applicants may contribute the required 

cash match directly or in cooperation 

with third parties. 

Continuation Grants. Continuation 

Grants (see sections II.B., III.D., V.B.2., 

VI.B., VII.B.1., VIII.A., and IX.5.H.1.b.) 

are intended to enhance specific 

programs or services begun during 

earlier Project Grants. An applicant for 

a Continuation Grant must submit a 

letter notifying the Institute of its intent 

to seek such funding no later than 120 

days before the end of the current grant 

period. The Institute will then notify the 

applicant of the deadline for its 

Continuation Grant application. 

Applicants for Continuation Grants 

will be required to contribute a cash 

match of not less than 50% of the total 

cost of the ongoing project. In other 

words, grant awards by SJI must be 

matched at least dollar for dollar by 

grant applicants. Applicants may 

contribute the required cash match 

directly or in cooperation with third 

parties. 

Technical Assistance Grants. Section 

II.C. reserves up to $300,000 for 

Technical Assistance Grants. Under this 

program, a State or local court or 

regional court association may receive a 

grant of up to $30,000 to engage outside 

experts to provide technical assistance 

to diagnose, develop, and implement a 

response to a jurisdiction’s problems. 

Letters of application for a Technical 

Assistance Grant may be submitted at 

any time. Applicants submitting letters 

by January 6, 2006 will be notified by 

April 7, 2006; those submitting letters 

between January 9 and February 24, 

2006 will be notified by June 9, 2006; 

those submitting letters between 

February 24 and June 2, 2006 will be 

notified by September 15, 2006; and 

those submitting letters between June 5 

and September 22, 2006 will be notified 

of the Board’s decision by December 1, 

2006. See section VI.B. for Technical 

Assistance Grant application 

procedures. 

Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grants. Section II.D. of the 

Guideline allocates up to $100,000 for 

grants under the JBE TA grant program 

this year. Grants of up to $20,000 are 

available to: (1) Enable a State or local 

court to adapt and deliver an education 

program that was previously developed 

and evaluated under an SJI project grant 

(i.e., curriculum adaptation); and/or (2) 

support expert consultation in planning, 

developing, and administering State 

judicial branch education programs. 

Letters requesting JBE TA Grants may 

be submitted at any time. The grant 

cycles for JBE TA Grants are the same 

as the grant cycles for TA Grants. 

Applicants submitting letters by 

January 6, 2006 will be notified by April 

7, 2006; those submitting letters 

between January 9 and February 24, 

2006 will be notified by June 9, 2006; 

those submitting letters between 

February 24 and June 2, 2006 will be 

notified by September 15, 2006; and 

those submitting letters between June 5 

and September 22, 2006 will be notified 

of the Board’s decision by December 1, 

2006. See section VI.D. for JBE TA Grant 

application procedures. 

Scholarships. Section II.E. of the 

Guideline allocates up to $200,000 for 

scholarships this year to enable judges 

and court managers to attend out-ofState education and training programs. 

A scholarship of up to $1,500 may be 

awarded to pay for a recipient’s tuition, 

travel, and lodging costs. 

Starting this year, scholarships can 

also be used to cover the costs of 

enrolling in on-line classes that meet the 

criteria for acceptable programs as 

described below. 

Scholarships for eligible applicants 

are approved largely on a ‘‘first come, 

first served’’ basis, although the Institute 

may approve or disapprove scholarship 

requests in order to achieve appropriate 

balances on the basis of geography, 

program provider, and type of court or 

applicant (e.g., trial judge, appellate 

judge, trial court administrator). 

Scholarships will be approved only for 

programs that either (1) enhance the 

skills of judges and court managers; or 

(2) are part of a graduate degree program 

for judges or court personnel. 

As before, recipients are limited to no 

more than one scholarship in a threeyear period, unless the course 

specifically assumes multi-year 

participation. 

Applicants interested in obtaining a 

scholarship for a program beginning 

between April 1 and June 30, 2006, 

must submit their applications and 

documents between January 2 and 

February 27, 2006. For programs 

beginning between July 1 and 

September 30, 2006, the applications 

and documents must be submitted 

between March 30 and May 26, 2006. 

For programs beginning between 

October 1 and December 31, 2006, the 

applications and documents must be 

submitted between July 3 and August 

25, 2006. For programs beginning 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72511 

between January 1 and March 31, 2007, 

the applications and documents must be 

submitted between October 2 and 

December 1, 2006. See section VI.E. for 

scholarship application procedures. 

Partner Grants. Partner Grants (see 

sections II.F., III.M., V., VI.F., VII., and 

VIII.D.) are intended to allow SJI and 

federal, State, or local agencies or 

foundations, trusts, or other private 

entities to combine financial resources 

in pursuit of common interests. SJI and 

its funding partners may meld, pick and 

choose, or waive their grant 

requirements, application procedures, 

or grant cycles to expedite the award of 

jointly-funded grants targeted at 

emerging or high priority problems 

confronting State and local courts. Like 

Project Grants, Partner Grants will be 

awarded only to support initiatives 

likely to have a significant national 

impact. 

Matching Requirements 

With the exception of JBE TA grantees 

and scholarship recipients, all grantees 

must provide a cash match for any 

Institute grant. The matching 

requirements are summarized in 

sections III.L. and VIII.A.8. of the 

Guideline. 

The following Grant Guideline is 

adopted by the State Justice Institute for 

FY 2006: 

Table of Contents 

I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute 

II. Scope of the Program 

III. Definitions 

IV. Eligibility for Award 

V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of 

Awards 

VI. Applications 

VII. Application Review Procedures 

VIII. Compliance Requirements 

IX. Financial Requirements 

X. Grant Adjustments 

Appendix A SJI Libraries: Designated Sites 

and Contacts 

Appendix B Illustrative List of Technical 

Assistance Grants 

Appendix C Illustrative List of Model 

Curricula 

Appendix D Grant Application Forms 

(Forms A, B, C, C1, D, and Disclosure of 

Lobbying Activities) 

Appendix E Line-Item Budget Form (Form 

E) 

Appendix F Scholarship Application Forms 

(Forms S1 and S2) 

I. The Mission of the State Justice 

Institute 

The Institute was established by Pub. 

L. 98–620 to improve the administration 

of justice in the State courts of the 

United States. Incorporated in the State 

of Virginia as a private, nonprofit 

corporation, the Institute is charged, by 

statute, with the responsibility to: 

• Direct a national program of 

financial assistance designed to assure 

that each citizen of the United States is 

provided ready access to a fair and 

effective system of justice; 

• Foster coordination and 

cooperation with the Federal judiciary; 

• Promote recognition of the 

importance of the separation of powers 

doctrine to an independent judiciary; 

and 

• Encourage education for judges and 

support personnel of State court systems 

through national and State 

organizations, including universities. 

To accomplish these broad objectives, 

the Institute is authorized to provide 

funds to State courts, national 

organizations which support and are 

supported by State courts, national 

judicial education organizations, and 

other organizations that can assist in 

improving the quality of justice in the 

State courts. 

The Institute is supervised by a Board 

of Directors appointed by the President, 

with the consent of the Senate. The 

Board is statutorily composed of six 

judges; a State court administrator; and 

four members of the public, no more 

than two of who can be of the same 

political party. 

Through the award of grants, 

contracts, and cooperative agreements, 

the Institute is authorized to perform the 

following activities: 

A. Support research, demonstrations, 

special projects, technical assistance, 

and training to improve the 

administration of justice in the State 

courts; 

B. Provide for the preparation, 

publication, and dissemination of 

information regarding State judicial 

systems; 

C. Participate in joint projects with 

Federal agencies and other private 

grantors; 

D. Evaluate or provide for the 

evaluation of programs and projects 

funded by the Institute to determine 

their impact upon the quality of 

criminal, civil, and juvenile justice and 

the extent to which they have 

contributed to improving the quality of 

justice in the State courts; 

E. Encourage and assist in furthering 

judicial education; 

F. Encourage, assist, and serve in a 

consulting capacity to State and local 

justice system agencies in the 

development, maintenance, and 

coordination of criminal, civil, and 

juvenile justice programs and services; 

and 

G. Be responsible for the certification 

of national programs that are intended 

to aid and improve State judicial 

systems. 

II. Scope of the Program 

A. Project Grants 

As set forth in Section I., the Institute 

is authorized to fund projects 

addressing a broad range of program 

areas. Though the Board is likely to 

favor Project Grant applications focused 

on the Special Interest program 

categories described below, potential 

applicants are also encouraged to bring 

to the attention of the Institute 

innovative projects outside those 

categories. Funds will not be made 

available for the ordinary, routine 

operation of court systems or programs 

in any of these areas. 

1. Special Interest Program Categories 

The Institute is interested in funding 

both innovative programs and programs 

of proven merit that can be replicated in 

other jurisdictions. The Institute is 

especially interested in funding projects 

that: 

• Formulate new procedures and 

techniques, or creatively enhance 

existing procedures and techniques; 

• Address aspects of the State judicial 

systems that are in special need of 

serious attention; 

• Have national significance by 

developing products, services, and 

techniques that may be used in other 

States; and 

• Create and disseminate products 

that effectively transfer the information 

and ideas developed to relevant 

audiences in State and local judicial 

systems, or provide technical assistance 

to facilitate the adaptation of effective 

programs and procedures in other State 

and local jurisdictions. 

A project will be identified as a 

Special Interest project if it meets the 

four criteria set forth above and it falls 

within the scope of the Special Interest 

program categories designated below. 

The Board has designated the areas 

set forth below as Special Interest 

program categories. The order of listing 

does not imply any ordering of priorities 

among the categories. 

a. Managing Self-Represented Litigation 

This category includes research, 

demonstration, evaluation, and 

education projects designed to improve 

the management of self-represented (pro 

se) litigation. 

The Institute is particularly interested 

in supporting innovative projects that: 

• Implement the next generation of 

innovations identified at the Summit on 

the Future of Self-Represented 

Litigation held in Chicago in March 

2005; 

• Compile and disseminate 

information on promising practices to 

72512 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

assist people who come to court without 

lawyers; and, 

• Test and evaluate approaches 

permitting self-represented litigants to 

file pleadings, responses, and other 

forms electronically. 

b. Application of Technology in the 

Courts 

This category includes the testing of 

innovative applications of technology to 

improve the operation of court 

management systems and judicial 

practices at both the trial and appellate 

court levels. The Institute seeks to 

support local experiments with 

promising but untested applications of 

technology in the courts that include an 

evaluation of the impact of the 

technology in terms of costs, benefits, 

and staff workload, and a training 

component to assure that staff is 

appropriately educated about the 

purpose and use of the new technology. 

In this context, ‘‘untested’’ includes 

novel applications of technology 

developed for the private sector that 

have not previously been applied in the 

courts. 

The Institute is particularly interested 

in supporting efforts to test and evaluate 

technologies that would: 

• Compile promising practices for 

coordinating and controlling the use of 

multiple technologies to enhance court 

processes. 

c. Children and Families in Court 

This category includes research, 

demonstration, evaluation, technical 

assistance, and education projects to 

identify and inform judges of 

innovative, effective approaches for 

handling cases involving children and 

families. The Institute is particularly 

interested in projects that would: 

• Implement the ‘‘next steps’’

identified for courts at the National 

Leadership Summit for Child Protection 

held in Minneapolis on September 20–

23, 2005. 

d. Performance Standards and Outcome 

Measures 

This category includes projects that 

will develop and measure performance 

standards and outcomes for all aspects 

of court operations. The Institute is 

particularly interested in projects that 

would: 

• Develop and test performance and 

outcome measures to assess the 

effectiveness of problem-solving courts. 

• Develop low cost methods for 

measuring performance. 

e. Elder Issues 

This category includes research, 

demonstration, evaluation, and 

education projects designed to improve 

management of guardianship, probate, 

fraud, Americans with Disability Act, 

and other types of elder-related cases. 

The Institute is particularly interested in 

projects that would: 

• Develop and evaluate judicial 

branch education programs addressing 

elder law and related issues. 

f. Relationship Between State and 

Federal Courts 

This category includes research, 

demonstration, evaluation, and 

education projects designed to facilitate 

appropriate and effective 

communication, cooperation, and 

coordination between State and federal 

courts and the courts, the legislative and 

executive branches, and the people. The 

Institute is particularly interested in 

projects that would: 

• Develop and test materials that 

judges and court leaders could use to 

educate community groups and 

constituencies about federalism and the 

courts and the importance of judicial 

independence. 

B. Continuation Grants 

This category includes critical SJIsupported Project Grants of proven 

merit to courts nationwide. These 

projects must have: 

1. Developed products, services, and 

techniques that may be used in States 

across the country; and 

2. Created and disseminated products 

that effectively transfer the information 

and ideas developed to relevant 

audiences in State and local judicial 

systems, or provide technical assistance 

to facilitate the adaptation of effective 

programs and procedures in other State 

and local jurisdictions. 

The application procedures for 

Continuation Grants may be found in 

section VI.B. 

C. Technical Assistance Grants 

The Board is reserving up to $300,000 

to support the provision of technical 

assistance to State and local courts and 

regional court associations. The program 

is designed to provide State and local 

courts with sufficient support to obtain 

technical assistance to diagnose a 

problem, develop a response to that 

problem, and implement any needed 

changes. The Institute will reserve 

sufficient funds each quarter to assure 

the availability of Technical Assistance 

Grants throughout the year. 

Technical Assistance Grants are 

limited to no more than $30,000 each, 

and shall only cover the cost of 

obtaining the services of expert 

consultants. Examples of expenses not 

covered Technical Assistance Grants 

include the salaries, benefits, travel, or 

training costs of full- or part-time court 

employees. Normally, the technical 

assistance must be completed within 12 

months after the start date of the grant. 

Only a State or local court or regional 

court association may apply for a 

Technical Assistance grant. The 

application procedures may be found in 

section VI.C. 

D. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Projects 

The Board is reserving up to $100,000 

to support technical assistance and onsite consultation in planning, 

developing, and administering 

comprehensive and specialized State 

judicial branch education programs, as 

well as the adaptation of model 

curricula previously developed with SJI 

funds. Judicial Branch Education 

Technical Assistance Grants are limited 

to no more than $20,000 each. 

The goals of the Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance 

Program (JBE TA) are to: 

1. Provide State and local courts and 

court associations with the opportunity 

to access expert strategic assistance to 

enable them to maintain judicial branch 

education programming during the 

current budget crisis; and 

2. Enable courts and court 

associations to modify a model 

curriculum, course module, or 

conference program developed with SJI 

funds to meet a particular State’s or 

local jurisdiction’s educational needs; 

train instructors to present portions or 

all of the curriculum; and pilot-test it to 

determine its appropriateness, quality, 

and effectiveness. An illustrative but 

non-inclusive list of the curricula that 

may be appropriate for adaptation is 

contained in Appendix C. 

Only State or local courts or court 

associations may apply for JBE TA 

funding. Application procedures may be 

found in Section VI.D. Applicants are 

not required to contribute cash match to 

JBE TA grants. 

E. Scholarships for Judges and Court 

Managers 

The Institute is reserving up to 

$200,000 to support a scholarship 

program for State judges and court 

managers. The purposes of the 

scholarship program are to: 

1. Enhance the skills, knowledge, and 

abilities of judges and court managers; 

2. Enable State court judges and court 

managers to attend out-of-State, or to 

enroll in online, educational programs 

sponsored by national and State 

providers that they could not otherwise 

attend or take online because of limited 

State, local, and personal budgets; and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72513 

3. Provide States, judicial educators, 

and the Institute with evaluative 

information on a range of judicial and 

court-related education programs. 

Priority will be given to scholarship 

applications for attendance at out-ofState educational programs within the 

United States. Application procedures 

may be found in Section VI.E. 

F. Partner Grants 

Though many, if not most, Partner 

Grants will fall under the Special 

Interest program categories cited in 

section II.A., proposals addressing other 

emerging or high priority court-related 

problems will be considered on a caseby-case basis. The amount of funds 

reserved by the Board for these grants 

will depend upon the partnering 

opportunities available. Any 

organization described in section IV. 

shall be eligible to apply for, or receive, 

a Partner Grant. 

III. Definitions 

The following definitions apply for 

the purposes of this Guideline: 

A. Acknowledgment of SJI Support 

The prominent display of the SJI logo 

on the front cover of a written product 

or in the opening frames of a videotape 

or DVD developed with Institute 

support, and inclusion of a brief 

statement on the inside front cover or 

title page of the document or the 

opening frames of the videotape or DVD 

identifying the grant number. See 

section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for the precise 

wording of the statement. 

B. Application 

A formal request for an Institute grant. 

A complete application consists of: 

Form A—Application; Form B—

Certificate of State Approval (for 

applications from local trial or appellate 

courts or agencies); Form C—Project 

Budget/Tabular Format or Form C1—

Project Budget/Spreadsheet Format; 

Form D—Assurances; Disclosure of 

Lobbying Activities; a detailed 

description, not to exceed 25 pages, of 

the need for the project and all related 

tasks, including the time frame for 

completion of each task, and staffing 

requirements; and a detailed budget 

narrative that provides the basis for all 

costs. See section VI. for a complete 

description of application submission 

requirements. See Appendix D for the 

application forms. 

C. Close-out 

The process by which the Institute 

determines that all applicable 

administrative and financial actions and 

all required grant work have been 

completed by both the grantee and the 

Institute. 

D. Continuation Grant 

A grant lasting no longer than 15 

months to permit completion of 

activities initiated under an existing 

Institute grant or enhancement of the 

products or services produced during 

the prior grant period. See section VI.B. 

for a complete description of 

Continuation Grant application 

requirements. 

E. Curriculum 

The materials needed to replicate an 

education or training program 

developed with grant funds including, 

but not limited to: The learning 

objectives; the presentation methods; a 

sample agenda or schedule; an outline 

of presentations and relevant 

instructors’ notes; copies of overhead 

transparencies or other visual aids; 

exercises, case studies, hypotheticals, 

quizzes, and other materials for 

involving the participants; background 

materials for participants; evaluation 

forms; and suggestions for replicating 

the program, including possible faculty 

or the preferred qualifications or 

experience of those selected as faculty. 

F. Designated Agency or Council 

The office or judicial body which is 

authorized under State law or by 

delegation from the State Supreme 

Court to approve applications for SJI 

grant funds and to receive, administer, 

and be accountable for those funds. 

G. Disclaimer 

A brief statement that must be 

included at the beginning of a document 

or in the opening frames of a videotape 

produced with Institute support that 

specifies that the points of view 

expressed in the document or tape do 

not necessarily represent the official 

position or policies of the Institute. See 

section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for the precise 

wording of this statement. 

H. Grant Adjustment 

A change in the design or scope of a 

project from that described in the 

approved application, acknowledged in 

writing by the Institute. See section X.A 

for a list of the types of changes 

requiring a formal grant adjustment. 

Changes requiring a Grant Adjustment 

(including budget reallocations between 

direct cost categories that individually 

or cumulatively exceed five percent of 

the approved original budget) must be 

requested at least 30 days in advance of 

the implementation of the requested 

change, except in the most 

extraordinary circumstances. 

I. Grantee 

The organization, entity, or individual 

to which an award of Institute funds is 

made. For a grant based on an 

application from a State or local court, 

grantee refers to the State Supreme 

Court or its designee. 

J. Human Subjects 

Individuals who are participants in an 

experimental procedure or who are 

asked to provide information about 

themselves, their attitudes, feelings, 

opinions, and/or experiences through an 

interview, questionnaire, or other data 

collection technique. 

K. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance (JBE TA) Grant 

A grant of up to $20,000 awarded to 

a State or local court or court 

association to support expert assistance 

in designing or delivering judicial 

branch education programming, and/or 

the adaptation of an education program 

based on an SJI-supported curriculum 

that was previously developed and 

evaluated under an SJI Project Grant. 

See section VI.D. for a complete 

description of JBE TA Grant application 

requirements. 

L. Match 

The portion of project costs not borne 

by the Institute. Match includes both 

cash and in-kind contributions. Cash 

match is the direct outlay of funds by 

the grantee or a third party to support 

the project. Examples of cash match are 

the dedication of funds to support a new 

employee or purchase new equipment 

to carry out the project or the 

application of project income (e.g., 

tuition or the proceeds of sales of grant 

products) generated during the grant 

period to grant costs. 

In-kind match consists of 

contributions of time and/or services of 

current staff members, space, supplies, 

etc., made to the project by the grantee 

or others (e.g., advisory board members) 

working directly on the project or that 

portion of the grantee’s Federally 

approved indirect cost rate that exceeds 

the Guideline’s limit of permitted 

charges (75% of salaries and benefits). 

Under normal circumstances, 

allowable match may be incurred only 

during the project period. When 

appropriate, and with the prior written 

permission of the Institute, match may 

be incurred from the date of the Board 

of Directors’ approval of an award. 

Match does not include the time of 

participants attending an education 

program. 

See section VIII.A.8. for the Institute’s 

matching requirements. 

72514 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

M. Partner Grant 

A flexible, loosely defined grant that 

maximizes the ability of SJI to pair with 

other government or philanthropic 

organizations to channel pooled 

financial resources to the most pressing 

dilemmas confronting State and local 

courts. The amount and duration of 

these grants will be determined on a 

case-by-case basis. The grant guidelines 

under which grantees will operate is 

likely to be an amalgam of the grant 

management best practices of SJI and its 

partner financiers. 

N. Products 

Tangible materials resulting from 

funded projects including, but not 

limited to: Curricula; monographs; 

reports; books; articles; manuals; 

handbooks; benchbooks; guidelines; 

videotapes; DVDs; audiotapes; computer 

software; and CD–ROM disks. 

O. Project Grant 

An initial grant lasting up to 36 

months to support an innovative 

education, research, demonstration, or 

technical assistance project that can 

improve the administration of justice in 

State courts nationwide. Ordinarily, a 

project grant may not exceed $300,000 

a year; however, a grant in excess of 

$200,000 is likely to be rare and 

awarded only to support highly 

promising projects that will have a 

significant national impact. 

P. Project-Related Income 

Interest, royalties, registration and 

tuition fees, proceeds from the sale of 

products, and other earnings generated 

as a result of an Institute grant. 

Registration and tuition fees, and 

proceeds from the sale of products 

generated during the grant period may 

be counted as match. For a more 

complete description of different types 

of project-related income, see section 

IX.G. 

Q. Scholarship 

A grant of up to $1,500 awarded to a 

judge or court manager to cover the cost 

of tuition, transportation, and 

reasonable lodging to attend an out-ofState educational program within the 

United States or to participate in an 

online course. See section VI.E. for a 

complete description of scholarship 

application requirements. 

R. Special Condition 

A requirement attached to a grant 

award that is unique to a particular 

project. 

S. State Supreme Court 

The highest appellate court in a State, 

or, for the purposes of the Institute 

program, a constitutionally or 

legislatively established judicial council 

that acts in place of that court. In States 

having more than one court with final 

appellate authority, State Supreme 

Court means that court which also has 

administrative responsibility for the 

State’s judicial system. State Supreme 

Court also includes the office of the 

court or council, if any, it designates to 

perform the functions described in this 

Guideline. 

T. Subgrantee 

A State or local court which receives 

Institute funds through the State 

Supreme Court. 

U. Technical Assistance Grant 

A grant, lasting up to 12 months, of 

up to $30,000 to a State or local court 

or regional court association to support 

outside expert assistance in diagnosing 

a problem and developing and 

implementing a response to that 

problem. See section VI.C. for a 

complete description of Technical 

Assistance Grant application 

requirements. 

IV. Eligibility for Award 

The Institute is authorized by 

Congress to award grants, cooperative 

agreements, and contracts to the 

following entities and types of 

organizations: 

A. State and local courts and their 

agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(A)). 

Each application for funding from a 

State or local court must be approved, 

consistent with State law, by the State’s 

Supreme Court or its designated agency 

or council. The latter shall receive all 

Institute funds awarded to such courts 

and be responsible for assuring proper 

administration of Institute funds, in 

accordance with section IX.C.2. of this 

Guideline. 

B. National nonprofit organizations 

controlled by, operating in conjunction 

with, and serving the judicial branches 

of State governments (42 U.S.C. 

10705(b)(1)(B)). 

C. National nonprofit organizations 

for the education and training of judges 

and support personnel of the judicial 

branch of State governments (42 U.S.C. 

10705(b)(1)(C)). An applicant is 

considered a national education and 

training applicant under section 

10705(b)(1)(C) if: 

1. The principal purpose or activity of 

the applicant is to provide education 

and training to State and local judges 

and court personnel; and 

2. The applicant demonstrates a 

record of substantial experience in the 

field of judicial education and training. 

D. Other eligible grant recipients (42 

U.S.C. 10705 (b)(2)(A)–(D)). 

1. Provided that the objectives of the 

project can be served better, the Institute 

is also authorized to make awards to: 

a. Nonprofit organizations with 

expertise in judicial administration; 

b. Institutions of higher education; 

c. Individuals, partnerships, firms, 

corporations (for-profit organizations 

must waive their fees); and 

d. Private agencies with expertise in 

judicial administration. 

2. The Institute may also make awards 

to State or local agencies and 

institutions other than courts for 

services that cannot be adequately 

provided through nongovernmental 

arrangements (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(3)). 

E. Inter-agency Agreements. The 

Institute may enter into inter-agency 

agreements with Federal agencies (42 

U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)) and private funders 

to support projects consistent with the 

purposes of the State Justice Institute 

Act. 

V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of 

Awards 

A. Types of Projects 

The Institute supports the following 

general types of projects: 

1. Education and training; 

2. Research and evaluation; 

3. Demonstration; and 

4. Technical assistance. 

B. Types of Grants 

In FY 2006, the Institute will support 

the following types of grants: 

1. Project Grants 

See sections II.A., III.O., VI.A., VII.B. 

and C., and VIII.A. Project Grants will 

be limited to only the Special Interest 

categories listed in section II.A. Should 

an insufficient number of qualifying 

applications be received, the Board 

reserves the right to solicit applications 

for projects spanning topics beyond 

those listed in section II.A. 

2. Continuation Grants 

See sections II.B., III.D. and VI.B. 

3. Technical Assistance Grants 

See sections II.C., III.U., and VI.C. In 

FY 2006, the Institute is reserving up to 

$300,000 for these grants. 

4. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grants 

See sections II.D., III.K., and VI.D. In 

FY 2006, the Institute is reserving up to 

$100,000 for Judicial Branch Education 

Technical Assistance Grants. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72515 

5. Scholarships 

See sections II.E., III.Q., and VI.E. In 

FY 2006, the Institute is reserving up to 

$200,000 for scholarships for judges and 

court managers. 

6. Partner Grants 

See sections II.F., III.M., V., VI.F., VII., 

and VIII.D. 

C. Maximum Size of Awards 

1. Applicants for Project Grants may 

request funding for amounts up to 

$300,000. 

2. Applicants for Continuation Grants 

may request funding for amounts up to 

$150,000. 

3. Applicants for Technical 

Assistance Grants may request funding 

for amounts up to $30,000. 

4. Applicants for Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grants 

may request funding for amounts up to 

$20,000. 

5. Applicants for scholarships may 

request funding for amounts up to 

$1,500. 

6. SJI and its financial partners may 

set any level of funding for Partner 

Grants, subject to the entire amount of 

the grant being available at the time of 

award; applicants for Partner Grants 

may request any amount of funding. 

D. Length of Grant Periods 

1. Grant periods for Project Grants 

ordinarily may not exceed 36 months. 

Absent extraordinary circumstances, no 

grant will continue for more than five 

years. 

2. Grant periods for Continuation 

Grants ordinarily may not exceed 15 

months. 

3. Grant periods for Technical 

Assistance Grants and Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grants 

ordinarily may not exceed 12 months. 

4. Grant periods for Partner Grants 

will be limited as necessary by SJI and 

its financial partners. 

VI. Applications 

A. Project Grants 

An application for a Project Grant 

must include an application form; 

budget forms (with appropriate 

documentation); a project abstract, 

program narrative, and budget narrative; 

a disclosure of lobbying form, when 

applicable; and certain certifications 

and assurances (see below). See 

Appendix D for the Project Grant 

application forms. For a summary of the 

application process, visit the Institute’s 

Web site (www.statejustice.org) and 

click on On-Line Tutorials, then Project 

Grant. 

1. Forms 

a. Application Form (FORM A) 

The application form requests basic 

information regarding the proposed 

project, the applicant, and the total 

amount of funding requested from the 

Institute. It also requires the signature of 

an individual authorized to certify on 

behalf of the applicant that the 

information contained in the 

application is true and complete; that 

submission of the application has been 

authorized by the applicant; and that if 

funding for the proposed project is 

approved, the applicant will comply 

with the requirements and conditions of 

the award, including the assurances set 

forth in Form D. 

b. Certificate of State Approval (FORM 

B) 

An application from a State or local 

court must include a copy of FORM B 

signed by the State’s Chief Justice or 

Chief Judge, the director of the 

designated agency, or the head of the 

designated council. The signature 

denotes that the proposed project has 

been approved by the State’s highest 

court or the agency or council it has 

designated. It denotes further that if the 

Institute approved funding for the 

project, the court or the specified 

designee will receive, administer, and 

be accountable for the awarded funds. 

c. Budget Forms (FORM C or C1) 

Applicants may submit the proposed 

project budget either in the tabular 

format of FORM C or in the spreadsheet 

format of FORM C1. Applicants 

requesting $100,000 or more are 

strongly encouraged to use the 

spreadsheet format. If the proposed 

project period is for more than a year, 

a separate form should be submitted for 

each year or portion of a year for which 

grant support is requested, as well as for 

the total length of the project. 

In addition to FORM C or C1, 

applicants must provide a detailed 

budget narrative providing an 

explanation of the basis for the 

estimates in each budget category. (See 

section VI.A.4. below.) 

If funds from other sources are 

required to conduct the project, either as 

match or to support other aspects of the 

project, the source, current status of the 

request, and anticipated decision date 

must be provided. 

d. Assurances (FORM D) 

This form lists the statutory, 

regulatory, and policy requirements 

with which recipients of Institute funds 

must comply. 

e. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities 

Applicants other than units of State or 

local government are required to 

disclose whether they, or another entity 

that is part of the same organization as 

the applicant, have advocated a position 

before Congress on any issue, and to 

identify the specific subjects of their 

lobbying efforts. (See section VIII.A.7.) 

2. Project Abstract 

The abstract should highlight the 

purposes, goals, methods, and 

anticipated benefits of the proposed 

project. It should not exceed 1 singlespaced page on 81⁄2 by 11 inch paper. 

3. Program Narrative 

The program narrative for an 

application may not exceed 25 doublespaced pages on 81⁄2 by 11 inch paper. 

Margins must be at least 1 inch, and 

type size must be at least 12-point and 

12 cpi. The pages should be numbered. 

This page limit does not include the 

forms, the abstract, the budget narrative, 

and any appendices containing re ́sume ́s 

and letters of cooperation or 

endorsement. Additional background 

material should be attached only if it is 

essential to impart a clear 

understanding of the proposed project. 

Numerous and lengthy appendices are 

strongly discouraged. 

The program narrative should address 

the following topics: 

a. Project Objectives 

The applicant should include a clear, 

concise statement of what the proposed 

project is intended to accomplish. In 

stating the objectives of the project, 

applicants should focus on the overall 

programmatic objective (e.g., to enhance 

understanding and skills regarding a 

specific subject, or to determine how a 

certain procedure affects the court and 

litigants) rather than on operational 

objectives (e.g., provide training for 32 

judges and court managers, or review 

data from 300 cases). 

b. Program Areas To Be Covered 

The applicant should note the Special 

Interest category or categories that are 

addressed by the proposed project see 

section II.A. 

c. Need for the Project 

If the project is to be conducted in any 

specific location(s), the applicant 

should discuss the particular needs of 

the project site(s) to be addressed by the 

project and why those needs are not 

being met through the use of existing 

programs, procedures, services, or other 

resources. 

If the project is not site-specific, the 

applicant should discuss the problems 

72516 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

that the proposed project would 

address, and why existing programs, 

procedures, services, or other resources 

cannot adequately resolve those 

problems. The discussion should 

include specific references to the 

relevant literature and to the experience 

in the field. 

d. Tasks, Methods and Evaluations 

(1) Tasks and Methods. The applicant 

should delineate the tasks to be 

performed in achieving the project 

objectives and the methods to be used 

for accomplishing each task. For 

example: 

(a) For research and evaluation 

projects, the applicant should include 

the data sources, data collection 

strategies, variables to be examined, and 

analytic procedures to be used for 

conducting the research or evaluation 

and ensuring the validity and general 

applicability of the results. For projects 

involving human subjects, the 

discussion of methods should address 

the procedures for obtaining 

respondents’ informed consent, 

ensuring the respondents’ privacy and 

freedom from risk or harm, and 

protecting others who are not the 

subjects of research but would be 

affected by the research. If the potential 

exists for risk or harm to human 

subjects, a discussion should be 

included that explains the value of the 

proposed research and the methods to 

be used to minimize or eliminate such 

risk. 

(b) For education and training 

projects, the applicant should include 

the adult education techniques to be 

used in designing and presenting the 

program, including the teaching/ 

learning objectives of the educational 

design, the teaching methods to be used, 

and the opportunities for structured 

interaction among the participants; how 

faculty would be recruited, selected, 

and trained; the proposed number and 

length of the conferences, courses, 

seminars, or workshops to be conducted 

and the estimated number of persons 

who would attend them; the materials to 

be provided and how they would be 

developed; and the cost to participants. 

(c) For demonstration projects, the 

applicant should include the 

demonstration sites and the reasons 

they were selected, or if the sites have 

not been chosen, how they would be 

identified and their cooperation 

obtained; and how the program or 

procedures would be implemented and 

monitored. 

(d) For technical assistance projects, 

the applicant should explain the types 

of assistance that would be provided; 

the particular issues and problems for 

which assistance would be provided; 

how requests would be obtained and the 

type of assistance determined; how 

suitable providers would be selected 

and briefed; how reports would be 

reviewed; and the cost to recipients. 

(2) Evaluation. Every project must 

include an evaluation plan to determine 

whether the project met its objectives. 

The evaluation should be designed to 

provide an objective and independent 

assessment of the effectiveness or 

usefulness of the training or services 

provided; the impact of the procedures, 

technology, or services tested; or the 

validity and applicability of the research 

conducted. In addition, where 

appropriate, the evaluation process 

should be designed to provide ongoing 

or periodic feedback on the 

effectiveness or utility of the project in 

order to promote its continuing 

improvement. The plan should present 

the qualifications of the evaluator(s); 

describe the criteria that would be used 

to evaluate the project’s effectiveness in 

meeting its objectives; explain how the 

evaluation would be conducted, 

including the specific data collection 

and analysis techniques to be used; 

discuss why this approach would be 

appropriate; and present a schedule for 

completion of the evaluation within the 

proposed project period. 

The evaluation plan should be 

appropriate to the type of project 

proposed. For example: 

(a) Research. An evaluation approach 

suited to many research projects is a 

review by an advisory panel of the 

research methodology, data collection 

instruments, preliminary analyses, and 

products as they are drafted. The panel 

should be comprised of independent 

researchers and practitioners 

representing the perspectives affected 

by the proposed project. 

(b) Education and Training. The most 

valuable approaches to evaluating 

educational or training programs 

reinforce the participants’ learning 

experience while providing useful 

feedback on the impact of the program 

and possible areas for improvement. 

One appropriate evaluation approach is 

to assess the acquisition of new 

knowledge, skills, attitudes, or 

understanding through participant 

feedback on the seminar or training 

event. Such feedback might include a 

self-assessment of what was learned 

along with the participant’s response to 

the quality and effectiveness of faculty 

presentations, the format of sessions, the 

value or usefulness of the material 

presented, and other relevant factors. 

Another appropriate approach would be 

to use an independent observer who 

might request both verbal and written 

responses from participants in the 

program. When an education project 

involves the development of curricular 

materials, an advisory panel of relevant 

experts can be coupled with a test of the 

curriculum to obtain the reactions of 

participants and faculty as indicated 

above. 

(c) Demonstration. The evaluation 

plan for a demonstration project should 

encompass an assessment of program 

effectiveness (e.g., how well did it 

work?); user satisfaction, if appropriate; 

the cost-effectiveness of the program; a 

process analysis of the program (e.g., 

was the program implemented as 

designed, and/or did it provide the 

services intended to the targeted 

population?); the impact of the program 

(e.g., what effect did the program have 

on the court, and/or what benefits 

resulted from the program?); and the 

replicability of the program or 

components of the program. 

(d) Technical Assistance. For 

technical assistance projects, applicants 

should explain how the quality, 

timeliness, and impact of the assistance 

provided would be determined, and 

develop a mechanism for feedback from 

both the users and providers of the 

technical assistance. 

Evaluation plans involving human 

subjects should include a discussion of 

the procedures for obtaining 

respondents’ informed consent, 

ensuring the respondents’ privacy and 

freedom from risk or harm, and 

protecting others who are not the 

subjects of the evaluation but would be 

affected by it. Other than the provision 

of confidentiality to respondents, 

human subject protection issues 

ordinarily are not applicable to 

participants evaluating an education 

program. 

e. Project Management 

The applicant should present a 

detailed management plan, including 

the starting and completion date for 

each task; the time commitments to the 

project of key staff and their 

responsibilities regarding each project 

task; and the procedures that would 

ensure that all tasks are performed on 

time, within budget, and at the highest 

level of quality. In preparing the project 

time line, Gantt Chart, or schedule, 

applicants should make certain that all 

project activities, including publication 

or reproduction of project products and 

their initial dissemination, would occur 

within the proposed project period. The 

management plan must also provide for 

the submission of Quarterly Progress 

and Financial Reports within 30 days 

after the close of each calendar quarter 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72517 

(i.e., no later than January 30, April 30, 

July 30, and October 30). 

Applicants should be aware that the 

Institute is unlikely to approve more 

than one limited extension of the grant 

period. Therefore, the management plan 

should be as realistic as possible and 

fully reflect the time commitments of 

the proposed project staff and 

consultants. 

f. Products 

The program narrative in the 

application should contain a description 

of the products to be developed (e.g., 

training curricula and materials, 

videotapes, DVDs, articles, manuals, or 

handbooks), including when they would 

be submitted to the Institute. The budget 

should include the cost of producing 

and disseminating the product to each 

in-State SJI library (see Appendix A), 

State chief justice, State court 

administrator, and other appropriate 

judges or court personnel. 

(1) Dissemination Plan. The 

application must explain how and to 

whom the products would be 

disseminated; describe how they would 

benefit the State courts, including how 

they could be used by judges and court 

personnel; identify development, 

production, and dissemination costs 

covered by the project budget; and 

present the basis on which products and 

services developed or provided under 

the grant would be offered to the courts 

community and the public at large (i.e., 

whether products would be distributed 

at no cost to recipients, or if costs are 

involved, the reason for charging 

recipients and the estimated price of the 

product) (see section VIII.A.11.b.). 

Ordinarily, applicants should schedule 

all product preparation and distribution 

activities within the project period. 

A copy of each product must be sent 

to the library established in each State 

to collect the materials developed with 

Institute support (a list of these libraries 

is contained in Appendix A). 

Applicants proposing to develop webbased products should provide for 

sending a hard-copy document to the 

SJI-designated libraries and other 

appropriate audiences to alert them to 

the availability of the web site or 

electronic product (i.e., a written report 

with a reference to the web site). 

Fifteen (15) copies of all project 

products must be submitted to the 

Institute, along with an electronic 

version in .html or .pdf format. 

(2) Types of Products and Press 

Releases. The type of product to be 

prepared depends on the nature of the 

project. For example, in most instances, 

the products of a research, evaluation, 

or demonstration project should include 

an article summarizing the project 

findings that is publishable in a journal 

serving the courts community 

nationally, an executive summary that 

would be disseminated to the project’s 

primary audience, or both. Applicants 

proposing to conduct empirical research 

or evaluation projects with national 

import should describe how they would 

make their data available for secondary 

analysis after the grant period (see 

section VIII.A.14.a.). 

The curricula and other products 

developed through education and 

training projects should be designed for 

use outside the classroom so that they 

may be used again by the original 

participants and others in the course of 

their duties. 

In addition, recipients of project 

grants must prepare a press release 

describing the project and announcing 

the results, and distribute the release to 

a list of national and State judicial 

branch organizations. SJI will provide 

press release guidelines and a list of 

recipients to grantees at least 30 days 

before the end of the grant period. 

(3) Institute Review. Applicants must 

submit a final draft of all written grant 

products to the Institute for review and 

approval at least 30 days before the 

products are submitted for publication 

or reproduction. For products in a 

videotape or CD–ROM format, 

applicants must provide for Institute 

review of the product at the treatment, 

script, rough-cut, and final stages of 

development, or their equivalents. No 

grant funds may be obligated for 

publication or reproduction of a final 

grant product without the written 

approval of the Institute (see section 

VIII.A.11.e.). 

(4) Acknowledgment, Disclaimer, and 

Logo. Applicants must also include in 

all project products a prominent 

acknowledgment that support was 

received from the Institute and a 

disclaimer paragraph based on the 

example provided in section 

VIII.A.11.a.2. of the Guideline. The 

‘‘SJI’’ logo must appear on the front 

cover of a written product, or in the 

opening frames of a video, unless the 

Institute approves another placement. 

g. Applicant Status 

An applicant that is not a State or 

local court and has not received a grant 

from the Institute within the past three 

years should state whether it is either a 

national non-profit organization 

controlled by, operating in conjunction 

with, and serving the judicial branches 

of State governments, or a national nonprofit organization for the education and 

training of State court judges and 

support personnel (see section IV.). If 

the applicant is a non-judicial unit of 

Federal, State, or local government, it 

must explain whether the proposed 

services could be adequately provided 

by non-governmental entities. 

h. Staff Capability 

The applicant should include a 

summary of the training and experience 

of the key staff members and 

consultants that qualify them for 

conducting and managing the proposed 

project. Resumes of identified staff 

should be attached to the application. If 

one or more key staff members and 

consultants are not known at the time of 

the application, a description of the 

criteria that would be used to select 

persons for these positions should be 

included. The applicant also should 

identify the person who would be 

responsible for managing and reporting 

on the financial aspects of the proposed 

project. 

i. Organizational Capacity 

Applicants that have not received a 

grant from the Institute within the past 

three years should include a statement 

describing their capacity to administer 

grant funds, including the financial 

systems used to monitor project 

expenditures (and income, if any), and 

a summary of their past experience in 

administering grants, as well as any 

resources or capabilities that they have 

that would particularly assist in the 

successful completion of the project. 

Unless requested otherwise, an 

applicant that has received a grant from 

the Institute within the past three years 

should describe only the changes in its 

organizational capacity, tax status, or 

financial capability that may affect its 

capacity to administer a grant. 

If the applicant is a non-profit 

organization (other than a university), it 

must also provide documentation of its 

501(c) tax-exempt status as determined 

by the Internal Revenue Service and a 

copy of a current certified audit report. 

For purposes of this requirement, 

‘‘current’’ means no earlier than two 

years prior to the present calendar year. 

If a current audit report is not 

available, the Institute will require the 

organization to complete a financial 

capability questionnaire, which must be 

signed by a Certified Public Accountant. 

Other applicants may be required to 

provide a current audit report, a 

financial capability questionnaire, or 

both, if specifically requested to do so 

by the Institute. 

j. Statement of Lobbying Activities 

Non-governmental applicants must 

submit the Institute’s Disclosure of 

Lobbying Activities Form, which 

72518 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

documents whether they, or another 

entity that is a part of the same 

organization as the applicant, have 

advocated a position before Congress on 

any issue, and identifies the specific 

subjects of their lobbying efforts (see 

Appendix D). 

k. Letters of Cooperation or Support 

If the cooperation of courts, 

organizations, agencies, or individuals 

other than the applicant is required to 

conduct the project, the applicant 

should attach written assurances of 

cooperation and availability to the 

application, or send them under 

separate cover. To ensure sufficient time 

to bring them to the Board’s attention, 

letters of support sent under separate 

cover must be received by February 17, 

2006. 

4. Budget Narrative 

The budget narrative should provide 

the basis for the computation of all 

project-related costs. When the 

proposed project would be partially 

supported by grants from other funding 

sources, applicants should make clear 

what costs would be covered by those 

other grants. Additional background 

information or schedules may be 

attached if they are essential to 

obtaining a clear understanding of the 

proposed budget. Numerous and 

lengthy appendices are strongly 

discouraged. 

The budget narrative should cover the 

costs of all components of the project 

and clearly identify costs attributable to 

the project evaluation. Under OMB 

grant guidelines incorporated by 

reference in this Guideline, grant funds 

may not be used to purchase alcoholic 

beverages. 

a. Justification of Personnel 

Compensation 

The applicant should set forth the 

percentages of time to be devoted by the 

individuals who would staff the 

proposed project, the annual salary of 

each of those persons, and the number 

of work days per year used for 

calculating the percentages of time or 

daily rates of those individuals. The 

applicant should explain any deviations 

from current rates or established written 

organizational policies. If grant funds 

are requested to pay the salary and 

related costs for a current employee of 

a court or other unit of government, the 

applicant should explain why this 

would not constitute a supplantation of 

State or local funds in violation of 42 

U.S.C. 10706(d)(1). An acceptable 

explanation may be that the position to 

be filled is a new one established in 

conjunction with the project or that the 

grant funds would support only the 

portion of the employee’s time that 

would be dedicated to new or additional 

duties related to the project. 

b. Fringe Benefit Computation 

The applicant should provide a 

description of the fringe benefits 

provided to employees. If percentages 

are used, the authority for such use 

should be presented, as well as a 

description of the elements included in 

the determination of the percentage rate. 

c. Consultant/Contractual Services and 

Honoraria 

The applicant should describe the 

tasks each consultant would perform, 

the estimated total amount to be paid to 

each consultant, the basis for 

compensation rates (e.g., the number of 

days multiplied by the daily consultant 

rates), and the method for selection. 

Rates for consultant services must be set 

in accordance with section IX.I.2.c. 

Prior written Institute approval is 

required for any consultant rate in 

excess of $300 per day; Institute funds 

may not be used to pay a consultant 

more than $900 per day. Honorarium 

payments must be justified in the same 

manner as consultant payments. 

d. Travel 

Transportation costs and per diem 

rates must comply with the policies of 

the applicant organization. If the 

applicant does not have an established 

travel policy, then travel rates must be 

consistent with those established by the 

Institute or the Federal Government (a 

copy of the Institute’s travel policy is 

available upon request). The budget 

narrative should include an explanation 

of the rate used, including the 

components of the per diem rate and the 

basis for the estimated transportation 

expenses. The purpose of the travel 

should also be included in the narrative. 

e. Equipment 

Grant funds may be used to purchase 

only the equipment necessary to 

demonstrate a new technological 

application in a court or that is 

otherwise essential to accomplishing the 

objectives of the project. Equipment 

purchases to support basic court 

operations ordinarily will not be 

approved. The applicant should 

describe the equipment to be purchased 

or leased and explain why the 

acquisition of that equipment is 

essential to accomplish the project’s 

goals and objectives. The narrative 

should clearly identify which 

equipment is to be leased and which is 

to be purchased. The method of 

procurement should also be described. 

Purchases of automated data processing 

equipment must comply with section 

IX.I.2.b. 

f. Supplies 

The applicant should provide a 

general description of the supplies 

necessary to accomplish the goals and 

objectives of the grant. In addition, the 

applicant should provide the basis for 

the amount requested for this 

expenditure category. 

g. Construction 

Construction expenses are prohibited 

except for the limited purposes set forth 

in section VIII.A.16.b. Any allowable 

construction or renovation expense 

should be described in detail in the 

budget narrative. 

h. Telephone 

Applicants should include 

anticipated telephone charges, 

distinguishing between monthly charges 

and long distance charges in the budget 

narrative. Also, applicants should 

provide the basis used to calculate the 

monthly and long distance estimates. 

i. Postage 

Anticipated postage costs for projectrelated mailings, including distribution 

of the final product(s), should be 

described in the budget narrative. The 

cost of special mailings, such as for a 

survey or for announcing a workshop, 

should be distinguished from routine 

operational mailing costs. The bases for 

all postage estimates should be included 

in the budget narrative. 

j. Printing/Photocopying 

Anticipated costs for printing or 

photocopying project documents, 

reports, and publications should be 

included in the budget narrative, along 

with the bases used to calculate these 

estimates. 

k. Indirect Costs 

Recoverable indirect costs are limited 

to no more than 75% of a grantee’s 

direct personnel costs (salaries plus 

fringe benefits). See sections III.L. and 

IX.I.4. 

Applicants should describe the 

indirect cost rates applicable to the 

grant in detail. If costs often included 

within an indirect cost rate are charged 

directly (e.g., a percentage of the time of 

senior managers to supervise project 

activities), the applicant should specify 

that these costs are not included within 

its approved indirect cost rate. These 

rates must be established in accordance 

with section IX.I.4. If the applicant has 

an indirect cost rate or allocation plan 

approved by any Federal granting 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72519 

agency, a copy of the approved rate 

agreement must be attached to the 

application. 

l. Match 

Applicants for Project Grants must 

provide a cash match equaling at least 

50% of the total cost of the project. 

For example, if the Institute awards 

an applicant $100,000 for a grant, the 

applicant, possibly in combination with 

a third party, would be required to 

provide a $100,000 cash match (note: a 

federal third party may contribute no 

more than 49% of the total cost of a 

project). 

Applicants that do not contemplate 

making matching contributions 

continuously throughout the course of 

the project or on a task-by-task basis 

must provide a schedule within 30 days 

after the beginning of the project period 

indicating at what points during the 

project period the matching 

contributions would be made (see 

sections III.L., VIII.A.8., and IX.E.1.). 

The Institute may waive the cash 

match requirements only in the most 

extraordinary circumstances (see section 

VIII.A.8.b.). 

5. Submission Requirements 

a. Every applicant must submit an 

original and three copies of the 

application package consisting of FORM 

A; FORM B, if the application is from 

a State or local court, or a Disclosure of 

Lobbying Form, if the applicant is not 

a unit of State or local government; the 

Budget Forms (either FORM C or C–1); 

the Application Abstract; the Program 

Narrative; the Budget Narrative; and any 

necessary appendices. 

All applications must be sent by first 

class or overnight mail or by courier no 

later than February 13, 2006. A 

postmark or courier receipt will 

constitute evidence of the submission 

date. Please mark PROJECT 

APPLICATION on the application 

package envelope and send it to: State 

Justice Institute, 1650 King Street, Suite 

600, Alexandria, VA 22314. 

Receipt of each application will be 

acknowledged in writing. Extensions of 

the deadline for submission of 

applications will not be granted without 

good cause. 

b. Applicants submitting more than 

one application may include material 

that would be identical in each 

application in a cover letter. This 

material will be incorporated by 

reference into each application and 

counted against the 25-page limit for the 

program narrative. A copy of the cover 

letter should be attached to each copy 

of the application. 

B. Continuation Grants 

1. Purpose 

Continuation grants are intended to 

support projects that carry out the same 

type of activities performed under a 

previous grant. They are intended to 

maintain or enhance the specific 

program or service produced or 

established during the prior grant 

period. 

2. Limitations 

The award of an initial grant to 

support a project does not constitute a 

commitment by the Institute to continue 

funding. For a project to be considered 

for continuation funding, the grantee 

must have completed all project tasks 

and met all grant requirements and 

conditions in a timely manner, absent 

extenuating circumstances or prior 

Institute approval of changes to the 

project design. Continuation grants are 

not intended to provide support for a 

project for which the grantee has 

underestimated the amount of time or 

funds needed to accomplish the project 

tasks. Absent extraordinary 

circumstances, no grant will continue 

for more than five years. 

3. Letters of Intent 

A grantee seeking a continuation grant 

must inform the Institute, by letter, of its 

intent to submit an application for such 

funding as soon as the need for 

continued funding becomes apparent 

but no less than 120 days before the end 

of the current grant period. 

a. A letter of intent must be no more 

than 3 single-spaced pages on 81⁄2 by 11 

inch paper and contain a concise but 

thorough explanation of the need for 

continuation; an estimate of the funds to 

be requested; and a brief description of 

anticipated changes in the scope, focus, 

or audience of the project. 

b. Within 30 days after receiving a 

letter of intent, Institute staff will review 

the proposed activities for the next 

project period and inform the grantee of 

specific issues to be addressed in the 

continuation application and the date 

by which the application must be 

submitted. 

4. Application Format 

An application for a continuation 

grant must include an application form, 

budget forms (with appropriate 

documentation), a project abstract, a 

program narrative, a budget narrative, a 

Certificate of State Approval—FORM B 

(if the applicant is a State or local 

court), a Disclosure of Lobbying 

Activities form (from applicants other 

than units of State or local government), 

and any necessary appendices. See 

Appendix D for the application forms. A 

continuation application should not 

repeat information contained in a 

previously approved application or 

other previously submitted materials, 

but should provide specific references 

to such materials where appropriate. 

For a summary of the application 

process, visit the Institute’s Web site 

(www.statejustice.org) and click on OnLine Tutorials, then Continuation Grant. 

The program narrative should 

conform to the length and format 

requirements set forth in section VI.A.3. 

However, rather than the topics listed 

there, the program narrative of a 

continuation application should 

include: 

a. Project Objectives. The applicant 

should clearly and concisely state what 

the continuation project is intended to 

accomplish. 

b. Need for Continuation. The 

applicant should explain why 

continuation of the project is necessary 

to achieve the goals of the project, and 

how the continuation would benefit the 

participating courts or the courts 

community generally, by explaining, for 

example, how the original goals and 

objectives of the project would be 

unfulfilled if it were not continued; or 

how the value of the project would be 

enhanced by its continuation. 

c. Report of Current Project Activities. 

The applicant should discuss the status 

of all activities conducted during the 

previous project period. Applicants 

should identify any activities that were 

not completed, and explain why. 

d. Evaluation Findings. The applicant 

should present the key findings, impact, 

or recommendations resulting from the 

evaluation of the project, if available, 

and how they would be addressed 

during the proposed continuation. If the 

findings are not yet available, the 

applicant should provide the date by 

which they would be submitted to the 

Institute. Ordinarily, the Board will not 

consider an application for continuation 

funding until the Institute has received 

the evaluator’s report. 

e. Tasks, Methods, Staff, and Grantee 

Capability. The applicant should fully 

describe any changes in the tasks to be 

performed, the methods to be used, the 

products of the project, and how and to 

whom those products would be 

disseminated, as well as any changes in 

the assigned staff or the grantee’s 

organizational capacity. Applicants 

should include, in addition, the criteria 

and methods by which the proposed 

continuation project would be 

evaluated. 

f. Task Schedule. The applicant 

should present a detailed task schedule 

and timeline for the next project period. 

72520 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

g. Other Sources of Support. The 

applicant should indicate why other 

sources of support would be inadequate, 

inappropriate, or unavailable. 

5. Budget and Budget Narrative 

a. Institute Funds 

The applicant should provide a 

complete budget and budget narrative 

conforming to the requirements set forth 

in section VI.A.4. above. Changes in the 

funding level requested should be 

discussed in terms of corresponding 

increases or decreases in the scope of 

activities or services to be rendered. In 

addition, the applicant should estimate 

the amount of grant funds that would 

remain unobligated at the end of the 

current grant period. 

b. Matching Contribution 

i. Applicants for Continuation Grants 

must provide a cash match equaling at 

least 50% of the total cost of the project. 

For example, if the Institute awards 

an applicant $100,000 for a continuation 

grant, the applicant, possibly in 

combination with a third party, would 

be required to provide a $100,000 cash 

match (note: a federal third party may 

contribute no more than 49% of the 

total cost of a project). 

ii. The Institute may waive the cash 

match requirements in extraordinary 

circumstances (see section VIII.A.8.c.). 

6. References to Previously Submitted 

Material 

A continuation application should not 

repeat information contained in a 

previously approved application or 

other previously submitted materials, 

but should provide specific references 

to such materials where appropriate. 

7. Submission Requirements 

The submission requirements set forth 

in section VI.A.5., other than the 

mailing deadline, apply to continuation 

applications. 

C. Technical Assistance Grants 

1. Purpose and Scope 

Technical Assistance Grants are 

awarded to State and local courts and 

regional court associations to obtain the 

assistance of outside experts in 

diagnosing, developing, and 

implementing a response to a particular 

problem in a jurisdiction. 

2. Application Procedures. 

For a summary of the application 

procedures for Technical Assistance 

Grants, visit the Institute’s Web site 

(www.statejustice.org) and click On-Line 

Tutorials, then Technical Assistance 

Grant. 

In lieu of formal applications, 

applicants for Technical Assistance 

Grants may submit, at any time, an 

original and three copies of a detailed 

letter describing the proposed project. 

Letters from an individual trial or 

appellate court must be signed by the 

presiding judge or manager of that court. 

Letters from the State court system must 

be signed by the Chief Justice or State 

Court Administrator. Letters from 

regional court associations must be 

signed by the president of the 

association. 

3. Application Format 

Although there is no prescribed form 

for the letter, or a minimum or 

maximum page limit, letters of 

application should include the 

following information: 

a. Need for Funding. What is the 

critical need facing the applicant? How 

would the proposed technical assistance 

help the applicant meet this critical 

need? Why cannot State or local 

resources fully support the costs of the 

required consultant services? 

b. Project Description. What tasks 

would the consultant be expected to 

perform, and how would they be 

accomplished? Which organization or 

individual would be hired to provide 

the assistance, and how was this 

consultant selected? If a consultant has 

not yet been identified, what procedures 

and criteria would be used to select the 

consultant? (Applicants are expected to 

follow their jurisdictions’ normal 

procedures for procuring consultant 

services.) What specific tasks would the 

consultant(s) and court staff undertake? 

What is the schedule for completion of 

each required task and the entire 

project? How would the applicant 

oversee the project and provide 

guidance to the consultant, and who at 

the court or association would be 

responsible for coordinating all project 

tasks and submitting quarterly progress 

and financial status reports? 

If the consultant has been identified, 

the applicant should provide a letter 

from that individual or organization 

documenting interest in and availability 

for the project, as well as the 

consultant’s ability to complete the 

assignment within the proposed time 

frame and for the proposed cost. The 

consultant must agree to submit a 

detailed written report to the court and 

the Institute upon completion of the 

technical assistance. 

c. Likelihood of Implementation. 

What steps have been or would be taken 

to facilitate implementation of the 

consultant’s recommendations upon 

completion of the technical assistance? 

For example, if the support or 

cooperation of specific court officials or 

committees, other agencies, funding 

bodies, organizations, or a court other 

than the applicant would be needed to 

adopt the changes recommended by the 

consultant and approved by the court, 

how would they be involved in the 

review of the recommendations and 

development of the implementation 

plan? 

d. Support for the Project From the 

State Supreme Court or Its Designated 

Agency or Council. If a State or local 

court submits a request for technical 

assistance, it must include written 

concurrence on the need for the 

technical assistance. This concurrence 

may be a copy of SJI Form B (see 

Appendix D) signed by the Chief Justice 

of the State Supreme Court or the Chief 

Justice’s designee, or a letter from the 

State Chief Justice or designee. The 

concurrence may be submitted with the 

applicant’s letter or under separate 

cover prior to consideration of the 

application. The concurrence also must 

specify whether the State Supreme 

Court would receive, administer, and 

account for the grant funds, if awarded, 

or would designate the local court or a 

specified agency or council to receive 

the funds directly. 

4. Budget and Matching State 

Contribution 

A completed Form E, Line-Item 

Budget Form (see Appendix E), and 

budget narrative must be included with 

the letter requesting technical 

assistance. The estimated cost of the 

technical assistance services should be 

broken down into the categories listed 

on the budget form rather than 

aggregated under the Consultant/ 

Contractual category. 

The budget narrative should provide 

the basis for all project-related costs, 

including the basis for determining the 

estimated consultant costs, if 

compensation of the consultant is 

required (e.g., the number of days per 

task times the requested daily 

consultant rate). Applicants should be 

aware that consultant rates above $300 

per day must be approved in advance by 

the Institute, and that no consultant will 

be paid more than $900 per day from 

Institute funds. In addition, the budget 

should provide for submission of two 

copies of the consultant’s final report to 

the Institute. 

A match must be provided in an 

amount equal to at least 50% of the 

grant amount requested, and 20% of the 

match provided must be cash. The 

Institute may waive the match and cash 

match requirements in extraordinary 

circumstances (see section VIII.A.8.b.). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72521 

Recipients of Technical Assistance 

Grants do not have to submit an audit 

report but must maintain appropriate 

documentation to support expenditures 

(see section VIII.A.3.). 

5. Submission Requirements 

Letters of application may be 

submitted at any time; however, all of 

the letters received during a calendar 

quarter will be considered at one time. 

Applicants submitting letters by January 

6, 2006 will be notified of the Institute’s 

decision by April 7, 2006; those 

submitting letters between January 9 

and February 24, 2006 will be notified 

by June 9, 2006; those submitting letters 

between February 24 and June 2, 2006 

will be notified by September 15, 2006; 

and those submitting letters between 

June 5 and September 22, 2006 will be 

notified by December 1, 2006. 

If the support or cooperation of 

agencies, funding bodies, organizations, 

or courts other than the applicant would 

be needed in order for the consultant to 

perform the required tasks, written 

assurances of such support or 

cooperation should accompany the 

application letter. Support letters also 

may be submitted under separate cover; 

however, to ensure that there is 

sufficient time to bring them to the 

attention of the Board’s Technical 

Assistance Grant Committee, letters sent 

under separate cover must be received 

by the same date as the technical 

assistance request being supported. 

D. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grants 

1. Purpose and Scope 

Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance (JBE TA) Grants are awarded 

to State and local courts and court 

associations to support: (1) The 

provision of expert strategic assistance 

designed to enable them to present 

judicial branch education programs; 

and/or (2) replication or modification of 

a model training program originally 

developed with Institute funds. 

Ordinarily, the Institute will support the 

adaptation of a specific curriculum once 

(i.e., with one grant) in a given State. 

JBE TA Grants may support 

consultant assistance in maintaining or 

developing systematic or innovative 

judicial branch educational 

programming. The assistance might 

include expert consultation in 

developing strategic plans to ensure the 

continued provision of judicial branch 

education programming despite fiscal 

constraints; development of improved 

methods for assessing the need for, and 

evaluating the quality and impact of, 

court education programs and their 

administration by State or local courts; 

faculty development; and/or topical 

program presentations. Such assistance 

may be tailored to address the needs of 

a particular State or local court or 

specific categories of court employees 

throughout a State or in a region. 

2. Application Procedures 

For a summary of the application 

procedures for Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grants, 

visit the Institute’s Web site 

(www.statejustice.org) and click on OnLine Tutorials, then Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grant. 

In lieu of formal applications, 

applicants should submit an original 

and three photocopies of a detailed 

letter. 

3. Application Format 

Although there is no prescribed 

format for the letter, or a minimum or 

maximum page limit, letters of 

application should include the 

following information: 

a. For On-Site Consultant Assistance: 

(1) Need for Funding. What is the 

critical judicial branch educational need 

facing the court or association? How 

would the proposed technical assistance 

help the applicant meet this critical 

need? Why cannot State or local 

resources fully support the costs of the 

required consultant services? 

(2) Project Description. What tasks 

would the consultant be expected to 

perform, and how would they be 

accomplished? Which organization or 

individual would be hired to provide 

the assistance, and how was this 

consultant selected? If a consultant has 

not yet been identified, what procedures 

and criteria would be used to select the 

consultant? (Applicants are expected to 

follow their jurisdictions’ normal 

procedures for procuring consultant 

services.) What specific tasks would the 

consultant(s) and court staff or 

association members undertake? What is 

the schedule for completion of each 

required task and the entire project? 

How would the applicant oversee the 

project and provide guidance to the 

consultant, and who at the court or 

affiliated with the association would be 

responsible for coordinating all project 

tasks and submitting quarterly progress 

and financial status reports? 

If the consultant has been identified, 

the applicant should provide a letter 

from that individual or organization 

documenting interest in and availability 

for the project, as well as the 

consultant’s ability to complete the 

assignment within the proposed time 

frame and for the proposed cost. The 

consultant must agree to submit a 

detailed written report to the court and 

the Institute upon completion of the 

technical assistance. 

(3) Likelihood of Implementation. 

What steps have been or would be taken 

to facilitate implementation of the 

consultant’s recommendations upon 

completion of the technical assistance? 

For example, if the support or 

cooperation of specific court or 

association officials or committees, 

other agencies, funding bodies, 

organizations, or a court other than the 

applicant would be needed to adopt the 

changes recommended by the 

consultant and approved by the 

applicant, how would they be involved 

in the review of the recommendations 

and development of the implementation 

plan? 

(4) Support for the Project From the 

State Supreme Court or Its Designated 

Agency or Council. If a State or local 

court submits an application, it must 

include written concurrence on the 

need for the technical assistance. This 

concurrence may be a copy of SJI Form 

B (see Appendix D) signed by the Chief 

Justice of the State Supreme Court or the 

Chief Justice’s designee, or a letter from 

the State Chief Justice or designee. The 

concurrence may be submitted with the 

applicant’s letter or under separate 

cover prior to consideration of the 

application. The concurrence also must 

specify whether the State Supreme 

Court would receive, administer, and 

account for the grant funds, if awarded, 

or would designate the local court or a 

specified agency or council to receive 

the funds directly. 

b. For Adaptation of a Curriculum: (1) 

Project Description. What is the title of 

the model curriculum to be adapted and 

who originally developed it with 

Institute funding? Why is this education 

program needed at the present time? 

What are the project’s goals? What are 

the learning objectives of the adapted 

curriculum? What program components 

would be implemented, and what types 

of modifications, if any, are anticipated 

in length, format, learning objectives, 

teaching methods, or content? Who 

would be responsible for adapting the 

model curriculum? Who would the 

participants be, how many would there 

be, how would they be recruited, and 

from where would they come (e.g., from 

across the State, from a single local 

jurisdiction, from a multi-State region)? 

(2) Need for Funding. Why are 

sufficient State or local resources 

unavailable to fully support the 

modification and presentation of the 

model curriculum? What is the potential 

for replicating or integrating the adapted 

curriculum in the future using State or 

72522 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

local funds, once it has been 

successfully adapted and tested? 

(3) Likelihood of Implementation. 

What is the proposed timeline, 

including the project start and end 

dates? On what date(s) would the 

judicial branch education program be 

presented? What process would be used 

to modify and present the program? 

Who would serve as faculty, and how 

were they selected? What measures 

would be taken to facilitate subsequent 

presentations of the program? 

Ordinarily, an independent evaluation 

of a curriculum adaptation project is not 

required; however, the results of any 

evaluation should be included in the 

final report. 

(4) Expressions of Interest by Judges 

and/or Court Personnel. Does the 

proposed program have the support of 

the court system or association 

leadership, and of judges, court 

managers, and judicial branch education 

personnel who are expected to attend 

(applicants may demonstrate this by 

attaching letters of support)? 

(5) Chief Justice’s Concurrence. Local 

courts should attach a concurrence form 

signed by the Chief Justice of the State 

or his or her designee (see Appendix D, 

FORM B). 

4. Budget and Matching State 

Contribution 

Applicants should attach a copy of 

budget Form E (see Appendix E) and a 

budget narrative (see A.4.d. in this 

section) that describes the basis for the 

computation of all project-related costs 

and the source of the match offered. As 

with TA grants to State or local courts, 

a match must be provided in an amount 

equal to at least 50% of the grant 

amount requested. Recipients of JBE TA 

grants are not required to provide a cash 

match. The Institute may waive the 

match requirements in extraordinary 

circumstances (see section VIII.A.8.b.). 

5. Submission Requirements 

Letters of application may be 

submitted at any time; however, all of 

the letters received during a calendar 

quarter will be considered at one time. 

Applicants submitting letters by January 

6, 2006 will be notified of the Institute’s 

decision by April 7, 2006; those 

submitting letters between January 9 

and February 24, 2006 will be notified 

by June 9, 2006; those submitting letters 

between February 24 and June 2, 2006 

will be notified by September 15, 2006; 

and those submitting letters between 

June 5 and September 22, 2006 will be 

notified by December 1, 2006. 

For curriculum adaptation requests, 

applicants should allow at least 60 days 

between the notification deadline and 

the date of the proposed program to 

allow sufficient time for needed 

planning. For example, a court that 

plans to conduct an education program 

in June 2006 should submit its 

application no later than January 6, 

2006, in time for the Board’s Spring 

meeting. 

E. Scholarships 

1. Purpose and Scope 

The purposes of the Institute’s 

scholarship program are to enhance the 

skills, knowledge, and abilities of judges 

and court managers; enable State court 

judges and court managers to attend outof-State educational programs 

sponsored by national and State 

providers that they could not otherwise 

attend because of limited State, local, 

and personal budgets; allow State court 

judges and court managers to enroll and 

participate in online courses; and 

provide States, judicial educators, and 

the Institute with evaluative information 

on a range of judicial and court-related 

education programs. 

Scholarships will be granted to 

individuals only for the purposes of 

attending an educational program in 

another State or enrolling in an online 

educational program. An applicant may 

apply for a scholarship for only one 

educational program during any one 

application cycle. 

Scholarship funds may be used only 

to cover the costs of tuition, 

transportation, and reasonable lodging 

expenses (not to exceed $150 per night, 

including taxes). Transportation 

expenses may include round-trip coach 

airfare or train fare. Scholarship 

recipients are strongly encouraged to 

take advantage of excursion or other 

special airfares (e.g., reductions offered 

when a ticket is purchased 21 days in 

advance of the travel date) when making 

their travel arrangements. Recipients 

who drive to a program site may receive 

$.485/mile up to the amount of the 

advanced-purchase round-trip airfare 

between their homes and the program 

sites. Funds to pay tuition, 

transportation, and lodging expenses in 

excess of $1,500 and other costs of 

attending the program—such as meals, 

materials, transportation to and from 

airports, and local transportation 

(including rental cars)—at the program 

site must be obtained from other sources 

or borne by the scholarship recipient. 

Scholarship applicants are encouraged 

to check other sources of financial 

assistance and to combine aid from 

various sources whenever possible. 

A scholarship is not transferable to 

another individual. It may be used only 

for the course specified in the 

application unless the applicant’s 

request to attend a different course that 

meets the eligibility requirements is 

approved in writing by the Institute. 

Decisions on such requests will be made 

within 30 days after the receipt of the 

request letter. 

2. Eligibility Requirements 

For a summary of the scholarship 

award process, visit the Institute’s Web 

site at www.statejustice.org and click on 

On-Line Tutorials, then Scholarship. 

a. Recipients. Scholarships can be 

awarded only to full-time judges of State 

or local trial and appellate courts; fulltime professional, State, or local court 

personnel with management 

responsibilities; and supervisory and 

management probation personnel in 

judicial branch probation offices. Senior 

judges, part-time judges, quasi-judicial 

hearing officers including referees and 

commissioners, administrative law 

judges, staff attorneys, law clerks, line 

staff, law enforcement officers, and 

other executive branch personnel are 

not eligible to receive a scholarship. 

b. Courses. A scholarship can be 

awarded only for a course presented in 

a State other than the one in which the 

applicant resides or works or online. 

The course must be designed to enhance 

the skills of new or experienced judges 

and court managers; or be offered by a 

recognized graduate program for judges 

or court managers. The annual or midyear meeting of a State or national 

organization of which the applicant is a 

member does not qualify as an out-ofState educational program for 

scholarship purposes, even though it 

may include workshops or other 

training sessions. 

Applicants are encouraged not to wait 

for the decision on a scholarship to 

register for an educational program they 

wish to attend. 

c. Limitation. Applicants may not 

receive more than one scholarship in a 

three-year period unless the course 

specifically assumes multi-year 

participation. 

3. Forms 

a. Scholarship Application—FORM S1 

(Appendix F) 

The Scholarship Application requests 

basic information about the applicant 

and the educational program the 

applicant would like to attend. It also 

addresses the applicant’s commitment 

to share the skills and knowledge gained 

with local court colleagues and to 

submit an evaluation of the program the 

applicant attends. The Scholarship 

Application must bear the original 

signature of the applicant. Faxed or 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72523 

photocopied signatures will not be 

accepted. The Institute anticipates 

switching to an electronic scholarship 

application process sometime during 

fiscal year 2006. 

b. Scholarship Application 

Concurrence—FORM S2 (Appendix F) 

Judges and court managers applying 

for scholarships must submit the written 

concurrence of the Chief Justice of the 

State’s Supreme Court (or the Chief 

Justice’s designee) on the Institute’s 

Judicial Education Scholarship 

Concurrence form (see Appendix F). 

The signature of the presiding judge of 

the applicant’s court cannot be 

substituted for that of the Chief Justice 

or the Chief Justice’s designee. Court 

managers, other than elected clerks of 

court, also must submit a letter of 

support from their immediate 

supervisors. 

4. Submission Requirements 

Scholarship applications must be 

submitted during the periods specified 

below: 

January 2 and February 27, 2006—for 

programs beginning between April 1 

and June 30, 2006; 

March 30 and May 26, 2006—for 

programs beginning between July 1 and 

September 30, 2006; 

July 3 and August 25, 2006—for 

programs beginning between October 1 

and December 31, 2006; and 

October 2 and December 1, 2006—for 

programs beginning between January 1 

and March 31, 2007. 

No exceptions or extensions will be 

granted. Applications sent prior to the 

beginning of an application period will 

be treated as having been sent one week 

after the beginning of that application 

period. All the required items must be 

received for an application to be 

considered. If the Concurrence form or 

letter of support is sent separately from 

the application, the postmark date of the 

last item to be sent will be used in 

applying the above criteria. 

All applications should be sent by 

mail or courier (not fax or e-mail) to: 

Scholarship Program Coordinator, State 

Justice Institute, 1650 King Street, Suite 

600, Alexandria, VA 22314. 

F. Partner Grants 

1. Purpose and Scope 

The purpose of the Institute’s Partner 

Grants is to marry government and 

philanthropic organizations rich in 

financial resources with courts and 

court-related organizations that are long 

on talent but short on cash. These grants 

are a direct response to the 

Congressionally mandated 50 percent 

cash match applied to Project and 

Continuation Grants. SJI realizes that 

many worthy potential applicants will 

not be able to make the cash match 

requirement. Therefore, it is incumbent 

upon SJI to attempt to actively bring 

resources, needs, and capabilities 

together to further the interests of all. 

The terms and conditions of Partner 

Grants have been loosely defined to 

maximize participation by potential 

financial partners. SJI anticipates that 

many awards under this program will be 

one of a kind and will require unique 

grant application and management 

procedures. 

Therefore, the application procedures 

for Partner Grants will be determined by 

SJI and its financial partners on a caseby-case basis. 

VII. Application Review Procedures 

A. Preliminary Inquiries 

The Institute staff will answer 

inquiries concerning application 

procedures. The staff contact will be 

named in the Institute’s letter 

acknowledging receipt of the 

application. 

B. Selection Criteria 

1. Project and Continuation Grant 

Applications 

a. Project and Continuation Grant 

applications will be rated on the basis 

of the criteria set forth below. The 

Institute will accord the greatest weight 

to the following criteria: 

(1) The soundness of the 

methodology; 

(2) The demonstration of need for the 

project; 

(3) The appropriateness of the 

proposed evaluation design; 

(4) If applicable, the key findings and 

recommendations of the most recent 

evaluation and the proposed responses 

to those findings and recommendations; 

(5) The applicant’s management plan 

and organizational capabilities; 

(6) The qualifications of the project’s 

staff; 

(7) The products and benefits 

resulting from the project, including the 

extent to which the project will have 

long-term benefits for State courts across 

the nation; 

(8) The degree to which the findings, 

procedures, training, technology, or 

other results of the project can be 

transferred to other jurisdictions; 

(9) The reasonableness of the 

proposed budget; 

(10) The demonstration of cooperation 

and support of other agencies that may 

be affected by the project; and, 

(11) The proposed project’s 

relationship to one of the Special 

Interest categories set forth in section 

II.A. 

b. In determining which projects to 

support, the Institute will also consider 

whether the applicant is a State court, 

a national court support or education 

organization, a non-court unit of 

government, or other type of entity 

eligible to receive grants under the 

Institute’s enabling legislation (see 

section IV.); the availability of financial 

assistance from other sources for the 

project; the amount of the applicant’s 

match; the extent to which the proposed 

project would also benefit the Federal 

courts or help State courts enforce 

Federal constitutional and legislative 

requirements; and the level of 

appropriations available to the Institute 

in the current year and the amount 

expected to be available in succeeding 

fiscal years. 

2. Technical Assistance Grant 

Applications 

Technical Assistance Grant 

applications will be rated on the basis 

of the following criteria: 

a. Whether the assistance would 

address a critical need of the applicant; 

b. The soundness of the technical 

assistance approach to the problem; 

c. The qualifications of the 

consultant(s) to be hired, or the specific 

criteria that will be used to select the 

consultant(s); 

d. The commitment of the court or 

association to act on the consultant’s 

recommendations; and, 

e. The reasonableness of the proposed 

budget. 

The Institute also will consider factors 

such as the level and nature of the 

match that would be provided, diversity 

of subject matter, geographic diversity, 

the level of appropriations available to 

the Institute in the current year, and the 

amount expected to be available in 

succeeding fiscal years. 

3. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grant Applications 

Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grant applications will be 

rated on the basis of the following 

criteria: 

a. For on-site consultant assistance: 

(1) Whether the assistance would 

address a critical need of the court or 

association; 

(2) The soundness of the technical 

assistance approach to the problem; 

(3) The qualifications of the 

consultant(s) to be hired, or the specific 

criteria that will be used to select the 

consultant(s); 

(4) The commitment of the court or 

association to act on the consultant’s 

recommendations; and, 

72524 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

(5) The reasonableness of the 

proposed budget. 

b. For curriculum adaptation projects: 

(1) The goals and objectives of the 

proposed project; 

(2) The need for outside funding to 

support the program; 

(3) The appropriateness of the 

approach in achieving the project’s 

educational objectives; 

(4) The likelihood of effective 

implementation and integration of the 

modified curriculum into ongoing 

educational programming; and, 

(5) Expressions of interest by the 

judges and/or court personnel who 

would be directly involved in or 

affected by the project. 

The Institute will also consider factors 

such as the reasonableness of the 

amount requested, compliance with 

match requirements, diversity of subject 

matter, geographic diversity, the level of 

appropriations available in the current 

year, and the amount expected to be 

available in succeeding fiscal years. 

4. Scholarships 

Scholarships will be awarded on the 

basis of: 

a. The date on which the application 

and concurrence (and support letter, if 

required) were sent; 

b. The unavailability of State or local 

funds or scholarship funds from another 

source to cover the costs of attending 

the program, or participating online; 

c. The absence of educational 

programs in the applicant’s State 

addressing the topic(s) covered by the 

educational program for which the 

scholarship is being sought; 

d. Geographic balance among the 

recipients; 

e. The balance of scholarships among 

educational programs; 

f. The balance of scholarships among 

the types of courts represented; and, 

g. The level of appropriations 

available to the Institute in the current 

year and the amount expected to be 

available in succeeding fiscal years. 

The postmark or courier receipt will 

be used to determine the date on which 

the application form and other required 

items were sent. 

5. Partner Grants 

It seems probable that the selection 

criteria for Partner Grants will be driven 

by the collective priorities of the 

‘‘bankers’ roundtable’’ that forms 

around this grant-making opportunity 

and the collective assessments of 

roundtable participants regarding the 

needs and capabilities of court and 

court-related organizations. Having 

settled on priorities, SJI and its financial 

partners will likely contact the courts or 

court-related organizations most 

acceptable as pilots, laboratories, 

consultants, or the like. 

C. Review and Approval Process 

1. Project and Continuation Grant 

Applications 

The Institute’s Board of Directors will 

review the applications competitively. 

The Institute staff will prepare a 

narrative summary and a rating sheet 

assigning points for each relevant 

selection criterion. The staff will present 

the narrative summaries and rating 

sheets to the Board for its review. The 

Board will review all application 

summaries and decide which projects it 

will fund. The decision to fund a project 

is solely that of the Board of Directors. 

The Chairman of the Board will sign 

approved awards on behalf of the 

Institute. 

2. Technical Assistance and Judicial 

Branch Education Technical Assistance 

Grant Applications 

The Institute staff will prepare a 

narrative summary of each application 

and a rating sheet assigning points for 

each relevant selection criterion. The 

Board of Directors has delegated its 

authority to approve Technical 

Assistance and Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grants 

to the committee established for each 

program. The committee will review the 

applications competitively. 

The Chairman of the Board will sign 

approved awards on behalf of the 

Institute. 

3. Scholarships 

A committee of the Institute’s Board 

of Directors will review scholarship 

applications quarterly. The Board of 

Directors has delegated its authority to 

approve scholarships to the committee 

established for the program. The 

committee will review the applications 

competitively. In the event of a tie vote, 

the Chairman will serve as the tiebreaker. 

The Chairman of the Board will sign 

approved awards on behalf of the 

Institute. 

4. Partner Grants 

SJI’s internal process for the review 

and approval of Partner Grants will 

depend upon negotiations with fellow 

financiers. SJI may use its procedures, a 

partner’s procedures, a mix of both, or 

entirely unique procedures. All Partner 

Grants will have to be approved by the 

Board of Directors on whatever schedule 

makes sense at the time. 

D. Return Policy 

Unless a specific request is made, 

unsuccessful applications will not be 

returned. Applicants are advised that 

Institute records are subject to the 

provisions of the Federal Freedom of 

Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. 

E. Notification of Board Decision 

1. The Institute will send written 

notice to applicants concerning all 

Board decisions to approve, defer, or 

deny their respective applications. For 

all applications (except scholarships), 

the Institute also will convey the key 

issues and questions that arose during 

the review process. A decision by the 

Board to deny an application may not be 

appealed, but it does not prohibit 

resubmission of a proposal based on 

that application in a subsequent funding 

cycle. The Institute will also notify the 

State court administrator when grants 

are approved by the Board to support 

projects that will be conducted by or 

involve courts in that State. 

2. The Institute intends to notify each 

scholarship applicant of the Board 

committee’s decision within 30 days 

after the close of the relevant 

application period. 

F. Response to Notification of Approval 

With the exception of those approved 

for scholarships, applicants have 30 

days from the date of the letter notifying 

them that the Board has approved their 

application to respond to any revisions 

requested by the Board. If the requested 

revisions (or a reasonable schedule for 

submitting such revisions) have not 

been submitted to the Institute within 

30 days after notification, the approval 

may be rescinded and the application 

presented to the Board for 

reconsideration. 

VIII. Compliance Requirements 

The State Justice Institute Act 

contains limitations and conditions on 

grants, contracts, and cooperative 

agreements awarded by the Institute. 

The Board of Directors has approved 

additional policies governing the use of 

Institute grant funds. These statutory 

and policy requirements are set forth 

below. 

A. Recipients of Project and 

Continuation Grants 

1. Advocacy 

No funds made available by the 

Institute may be used to support or 

conduct training programs for the 

purpose of advocating particular 

nonjudicial public policies or 

encouraging nonjudicial political 

activities. 42 U.S.C. 10706(b). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72525 

2. Approval of Key Staff 

If the qualifications of an employee or 

consultant assigned to a key project staff 

position are not described in the 

application or if there is a change of a 

person assigned to such a position, the 

recipient must submit a description of 

the qualifications of the newly assigned 

person to the Institute. Prior written 

approval of the qualifications of the new 

person assigned to a key staff position 

must be received from the Institute 

before the salary or consulting fee of 

that person and associated costs may be 

paid or reimbursed from grant funds. 

3. Audit 

Recipients of project and continuation 

grants must provide for an annual fiscal 

audit which includes an opinion on 

whether the financial statements of the 

grantee present fairly its financial 

position and its financial operations are 

in accordance with generally accepted 

accounting principles (see section IX.K. 

of the Guideline for the requirements of 

such audits). Scholarship recipients, 

Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grants, and Technical 

Assistance Grants are not required to 

submit an audit, but they must maintain 

appropriate documentation to support 

all expenditures. 

4. Budget Revisions 

Budget revisions among direct cost 

categories that: (a) Transfer grant funds 

to an unbudgeted cost category, or (b) 

individually or cumulatively exceed 

five percent of the approved original 

budget or the most recently approved 

revised budget require prior Institute 

approval. Failure to comply with these 

requirements could result in the 

termination of a grantee’s award. 

5. Conflict of Interest 

Personnel and other officials 

connected with Institute-funded 

programs must adhere to the following 

requirements: 

a. No official or employee of a 

recipient court or organization shall 

participate personally through decision, 

approval, disapproval, recommendation, 

the rendering of advice, investigation, or 

otherwise in any proceeding, 

application, request for a ruling or other 

determination, contract, grant, 

cooperative agreement, claim, 

controversy, or other particular matter 

in which Institute funds are used, 

where, to his or her knowledge, he or 

she or his or her immediate family, 

partners, organization other than a 

public agency in which he or she is 

serving as officer, director, trustee, 

partner, or employee or any person or 

organization with whom he or she is 

negotiating or has any arrangement 

concerning prospective employment, 

has a financial interest. 

b. In the use of Institute project funds, 

an official or employee of a recipient 

court or organization shall avoid any 

action which might result in or create 

the appearance of: 

(1) Using an official position for 

private gain; or 

(2) Affecting adversely the confidence 

of the public in the integrity of the 

Institute program. 

c. Requests for proposals or 

invitations for bids issued by a recipient 

of Institute funds or a subgrantee or 

subcontractor will provide notice to 

prospective bidders that the contractors 

who develop or draft specifications, 

requirements, statements of work, and/ 

or requests for proposals for a proposed 

procurement will be excluded from 

bidding on or submitting a proposal to 

compete for the award of such 

procurement. 

6. Inventions and Patents 

If any patentable items, patent rights, 

processes, or inventions are produced in 

the course of Institute-sponsored work, 

such fact shall be promptly and fully 

reported to the Institute. Unless there is 

a prior agreement between the grantee 

and the Institute on disposition of such 

items, the Institute shall determine 

whether protection of the invention or 

discovery shall be sought. The Institute 

will also determine how the rights in 

the invention or discovery, including 

rights under any patent issued thereon, 

shall be allocated and administered in 

order to protect the public interest 

consistent with ‘‘Government Patent 

Policy’’ (President’s Memorandum for 

Heads of Executive Departments and 

Agencies, February 18, 1983, and 

statement of Government Patent Policy). 

7. Lobbying 

a. Funds awarded to recipients by the 

Institute shall not be used, indirectly or 

directly, to influence Executive Orders 

or similar promulgations by Federal, 

State or local agencies, or to influence 

the passage or defeat of any legislation 

by Federal, State or local legislative 

bodies. 42 U.S.C. 10706(a). 

b. It is the policy of the Board of 

Directors to award funds only to support 

applications submitted by organizations 

that would carry out the objectives of 

their applications in an unbiased 

manner. Consistent with this policy and 

the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 10706, the 

Institute will not knowingly award a 

grant to an applicant that has, directly 

or through an entity that is part of the 

same organization as the applicant, 

advocated a position before Congress on 

the specific subject matter of the 

application. 

8. Matching Requirements 

All grantees other than scholarship 

recipients are required to provide a 

match (see section III.L. for the 

definition of match). The amount and 

nature of required match depends on 

the type grant and the duration of the 

Institute’s support. 

The grantee is responsible for 

ensuring that the total amount of match 

proposed is actually contributed. If a 

proposed contribution is not fully met, 

the Institute may reduce the award 

amount accordingly, in order to 

maintain the ratio originally provided 

for in the award agreement (see section 

IX.E.1.). 

The Board of Directors looks favorably 

upon any unrequired match contributed 

by applicants when making grant 

decisions. Cash match and non-cash 

match may be provided, subject to the 

requirements of subsection a. below. 

a. Project and Continuation Grants 

All grantees are required to provide a 

cash match equaling at least 50% of the 

total project cost. For example, if SJI 

awards a grantee $100,000, the grantee 

would be required to provide $100,000 

in cash match. 

b. Waiver. 

(1) The match requirement may be 

waived in exceptionally rare 

circumstances upon the request of the 

Chief Justice of the highest court in the 

State or the highest ranking official in 

the requesting organization and 

approval by the Board of Directors. 42 

U.S.C. 10705(d). 

(2) The Board of Directors encourages 

all applicants to provide the maximum 

amount of cash and in-kind match 

possible, even if a waiver is approved. 

The amount and nature of match are 

criteria in the grant selection process 

(see section VII.B.1.b.). 

9. Nondiscrimination 

No person may, on the basis of race, 

sex, national origin, disability, color, or 

creed be excluded from participation in, 

denied the benefits of, or otherwise 

subjected to discrimination under any 

program or activity supported by 

Institute funds. Recipients of Institute 

funds must immediately take any 

measures necessary to effectuate this 

provision. 

10. Political Activities 

No recipient may contribute or make 

available Institute funds, program 

personnel, or equipment to any political 

party or association, or the campaign of 

72526 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

any candidate for public or party office. 

Recipients are also prohibited from 

using funds in advocating or opposing 

any ballot measure, initiative, or 

referendum. Officers and employees of 

recipients shall not intentionally 

identify the Institute or recipients with 

any partisan or nonpartisan political 

activity associated with a political party 

or association, or the campaign of any 

candidate for public or party office. 42 

U.S.C. 10706(a). 

11. Products 

a. Acknowledgment, Logo, and 

Disclaimer 

(1) Recipients of Institute funds must 

acknowledge prominently on all 

products developed with grant funds 

that support was received from the 

Institute. The ‘‘SJI’’ logo must appear on 

the front cover of a written product, or 

in the opening frames of a video 

product, unless another placement is 

approved in writing by the Institute. 

This includes final products printed or 

otherwise reproduced during the grant 

period, as well as reprintings or 

reproductions of those materials 

following the end of the grant period. A 

camera-ready logo sheet is available 

from the Institute upon request. (2) Recipients also must display the 

following disclaimer on all grant 

products: ‘‘This [document, film, 

videotape, etc.] was developed under 

[grant/cooperative agreement] number 

SJI-[insert number] from the State 

Justice Institute. The points of view 

expressed are those of the [author(s), 

filmmaker(s), etc.] and do not 

necessarily represent the official 

position or policies of the State Justice 

Institute.’’

b. Charges for Grant-Related Products/ 

Recovery of Costs 

(1) When Institute funds fully cover 

the cost of developing, producing, and 

disseminating a product (e.g., a report, 

curriculum, videotape, or software), the 

product should be distributed to the 

field without charge. When Institute 

funds only partially cover the 

development, production, or 

dissemination costs, the grantee may, 

with the Institute’s prior written 

approval, recover its costs for 

developing, producing, and 

disseminating the material to those 

requesting it, to the extent that those 

costs were not covered by Institute 

funds or grantee matching 

contributions. 

(2) Applicants should disclose their 

intent to sell grant-related products in 

the application. Grantees must obtain 

the written prior approval of the 

Institute of their plans to recover project 

costs through the sale of grant products. 

Written requests to recover costs 

ordinarily should be received during the 

grant period and should specify the 

nature and extent of the costs to be 

recouped, the reason that such costs 

were not budgeted (if the rationale was 

not disclosed in the approved 

application), the number of copies to be 

sold, the intended audience for the 

products to be sold, and the proposed 

sale price. If the product is to be sold 

for more than $25, the written request 

also should include a detailed 

itemization of costs that will be 

recovered and a certification that the 

costs were not supported by either 

Institute grant funds or grantee 

matching contributions. (3) In the event that the sale of grant 

products results in revenues that exceed 

the costs to develop, produce, and 

disseminate the product, the revenue 

must continue to be used for the 

authorized purposes of the Institutefunded project or other purposes 

consistent with the State Justice 

Institute Act that have been approved by 

the Institute (see sections III.O. and 

IX.G. for requirements regarding projectrelated income realized during the 

project period). 

c. Copyrights 

Except as otherwise provided in the 

terms and conditions of an Institute 

award, a recipient is free to copyright 

any books, publications, or other 

copyrightable materials developed in 

the course of an Institute-supported 

project, but the Institute shall reserve a 

royalty-free, nonexclusive and 

irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, 

or otherwise use, and to authorize 

others to use, the materials for purposes 

consistent with the State Justice 

Institute Act. 

d. Distribution 

In addition to the distribution 

specified in the grant application, 

grantees shall send: (1) Fifteen (15) copies of each final 

product developed with grant funds to 

the Institute, unless the product was 

developed under either a Technical 

Assistance or a Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance grant, 

in which case submission of 2 copies is 

required; (2) An electronic version of the 

product in .html or .pdf format to the 

Institute; and 

(3) One copy of each final product 

developed with grant funds to the 

library established in each State to 

collect materials prepared with Institute 

support. (A list of the libraries is 

contained in Appendix A. Labels for 

these libraries are available on the 

Institute’s Web site, 

www.statejustice.org.). 

(4) Where possible and cost-effective, 

hard copies of products sent to SJI 

depository libraries should be bound 

rather than put in a ring binder. 

Grantees that develop web-based 

electronic products must send a hardcopy document to the SJI-designated 

libraries and other appropriate 

audiences to alert them to the 

availability of the Web site or electronic 

product. Recipients of Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance and 

Technical Assistance Grants are not 

required to submit final products to 

State libraries. 

(5) A press release describing the 

project and announcing the results to a 

list of national and State judicial branch 

organizations provided by the Institute. 

e. Institute Approval 

No grant funds may be obligated for 

publication or reproduction of a final 

product developed with grant funds 

without the written approval of the 

Institute. Grantees shall submit a final 

draft of each written product to the 

Institute for review and approval. The 

draft must be submitted at least 30 days 

before the product is scheduled to be 

sent for publication or reproduction to 

permit Institute review and 

incorporation of any appropriate 

changes required by the Institute. 

Grantees must provide for timely 

reviews by the Institute of videotape, 

DVD or CD-ROM products at the 

treatment, script, rough cut, and final 

stages of development or their 

equivalents. 

f. Original Material 

All products prepared as the result of 

Institute-supported projects must be 

originally-developed material unless 

otherwise specified in the award 

documents. Material not originally 

developed that is included in such 

products must be properly identified, 

whether the material is in a verbatim or 

extensive paraphrase format. 

12. Prohibition Against Litigation 

Support 

No funds made available by the 

Institute may be used directly or 

indirectly to support legal assistance to 

parties in litigation, including cases 

involving capital punishment. 

13. Reporting Requirements 

a. Recipients of Institute funds other 

than scholarships must submit 

Quarterly Progress and Financial Status 

Reports within 30 days of the close of 

each calendar quarter (that is, no later 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72527 

than January 30, April 30, July 30, and 

October 30). The Quarterly Progress 

Reports shall include a narrative 

description of project activities during 

the calendar quarter, the relationship 

between those activities and the task 

schedule and objectives set forth in the 

approved application or an approved 

adjustment thereto, any significant 

problem areas that have developed and 

how they will be resolved, and the 

activities scheduled during the next 

reporting period. Failure to comply with 

the requirements of this provision could 

result in the termination of a grantee’s 

award. 

b. The quarterly Financial Status 

Report must be submitted in accordance 

with section IX.H.2. of this Guideline. A 

final project Progress Report and 

Financial Status Report shall be 

submitted within 90 days after the end 

of the grant period in accordance with 

section IX.L.1. of this Guideline. 

14. Research 

a. Availability of Research Data for 

Secondary Analysis 

Upon request, grantees must make 

available for secondary analysis a 

diskette(s) or data tape(s) containing 

research and evaluation data collected 

under an Institute grant and the 

accompanying code manual. Grantees 

may recover the actual cost of 

duplicating and mailing or otherwise 

transmitting the data set and manual 

from the person or organization 

requesting the data. Grantees may 

provide the requested data set in the 

format in which it was created and 

analyzed. 

b. Confidentiality of Information 

Except as provided by Federal law 

other than the State Justice Institute Act, 

no recipient of financial assistance from 

SJI may use or reveal any research or 

statistical information furnished under 

the Act by any person and identifiable 

to any specific private person for any 

purpose other than the purpose for 

which the information was obtained. 

Such information and copies thereof 

shall be immune from legal process, and 

shall not, without the consent of the 

person furnishing such information, be 

admitted as evidence or used for any 

purpose in any action, suit, or other 

judicial, legislative, or administrative 

proceedings. 

c. Human Subject Protection 

All research involving human subjects 

shall be conducted with the informed 

consent of those subjects and in a 

manner that will ensure their privacy 

and freedom from risk or harm and the 

protection of persons who are not 

subjects of the research but would be 

affected by it, unless such procedures 

and safeguards would make the research 

impractical. In such instances, the 

Institute must approve procedures 

designed by the grantee to provide 

human subjects with relevant 

information about the research after 

their involvement and to minimize or 

eliminate risk or harm to those subjects 

due to their participation. 

15. State and Local Court Applications 

Each application for funding from a 

State or local court must be approved, 

consistent with State law, by the State’s 

Supreme Court, or its designated agency 

or council. The Supreme Court or its 

designee shall receive, administer, and 

be accountable for all funds awarded on 

the basis of such an application. 42 

U.S.C. 10705(b)(4). 

16. Supplantation and Construction 

To ensure that funds are used to 

supplement and improve the operation 

of State courts, rather than to support 

basic court services, funds shall not be 

used for the following purposes: 

a. To supplant State or local funds 

supporting a program or activity (such 

as paying the salary of court employees 

who would be performing their normal 

duties as part of the project, or paying 

rent for space which is part of the 

court’s normal operations); 

b. To construct court facilities or 

structures, except to remodel existing 

facilities or to demonstrate new 

architectural or technological 

techniques, or to provide temporary 

facilities for new personnel or for 

personnel involved in a demonstration 

or experimental program; or 

c. Solely to purchase equipment. 

17. Suspension or Termination of 

Funding 

After providing a recipient reasonable 

notice and opportunity to submit 

written documentation demonstrating 

why fund termination or suspension 

should not occur, the Institute may 

terminate or suspend funding of a 

project that fails to comply substantially 

with the Act, the Guideline, or the terms 

and conditions of the award. 42 U.S.C. 

10708(a). 

18. Title to Property 

At the conclusion of the project, title 

to all expendable and nonexpendable 

personal property purchased with 

Institute funds shall vest in the recipient 

court, organization, or individual that 

purchased the property if certification is 

made to and approved by the Institute 

that the property will continue to be 

used for the authorized purposes of the 

Institute-funded project or other 

purposes consistent with the State 

Justice Institute Act. If such certification 

is not made or the Institute disapproves 

such certification, title to all such 

property with an aggregate or individual 

value of $1,000 or more shall vest in the 

Institute, which will direct the 

disposition of the property. 

B. Recipients of Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance and 

Technical Assistance Grants 

Recipients of Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance and 

Technical Assistance Grants must 

comply with the requirements listed in 

section VIII.A. (except the requirements 

pertaining to audits in section VIII.A.3. 

and product dissemination and 

approval in section VIII.A.11.d. and e.) 

and the reporting requirements below: 

1. Judicial Branch Education Technical 

Assistance Grant Reporting 

Requirements 

Recipients of Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grants 

must submit one copy of the manuals, 

handbooks, conference packets, or 

consultant’s report developed under the 

grant at the conclusion of the grant 

period, along with a final report that 

includes any evaluation results and 

explains how the grantee intends to 

present the educational program in the 

future and/or implement the 

consultant’s recommendations, as well 

as two copies of the consultant’s report. 

2. Technical Assistance Grant Reporting 

Requirements 

Recipients of Technical Assistance 

Grants must submit to the Institute one 

copy of a final report that explains how 

it intends to act on the consultant’s 

recommendations, as well as two copies 

of the consultant’s written report. 

C. Scholarship Recipients 

1. Scholarship recipients are 

responsible for disseminating the 

information received from the course to 

their court colleagues locally and, if 

possible, throughout the State (e.g., by 

developing a formal seminar, circulating 

the written material, or discussing the 

information at a meeting or conference). 

Recipients also must submit to the 

Institute a certificate of attendance at 

the program, an evaluation of the 

educational program they attended, and 

a copy of the notice of any scholarship 

funds received from other sources. A 

copy of the evaluation must be sent to 

the Chief Justice of the scholarship 

recipient’s State. A State or local 

72528 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

jurisdiction may impose additional 

requirements on scholarship recipients. 

2. To receive the funds authorized by 

a scholarship award, recipients must 

submit a Scholarship Payment Voucher 

(Form S3) together with a tuition 

statement from the program sponsor, a 

transportation fare receipt (or statement 

of the driving mileage to and from the 

recipient’s home to the site of the 

educational program), and a lodging 

receipt. 

Scholarship Payment Vouchers must 

be submitted within 90 days after the 

end of the course which the recipient 

attended. 

3. Scholarship recipients are 

encouraged to check with their tax 

advisors to determine whether the 

scholarship constitutes taxable income 

under Federal and State law. 

D. Recipients of Partner Grants 

Compliance requirements for Partner 

Grants will likely be determined no later 

than the time of award, will depend 

upon the best judgments of SJI and its 

financial partners, and likely will be 

unique to each grant. 

IX. Financial Requirements 

A. Purpose 

The purpose of this section is to 

establish accounting system 

requirements and offer guidance on 

procedures to assist all grantees, with 

the possible exception of Partner Grant 

grantees, subgrantees, contractors, and 

other organizations in: 

1. Complying with the statutory 

requirements for the award, 

disbursement, and accounting of funds; 

2. Complying with regulatory 

requirements of the Institute for the 

financial management and disposition 

of funds; 

3. Generating financial data to be used 

in planning, managing, and controlling 

projects; and 

4. Facilitating an effective audit of 

funded programs and projects. 

B. References 

Except where inconsistent with 

specific provisions of this Guideline, the 

following circulars are applicable to 

Institute grants and cooperative 

agreements under the same terms and 

conditions that apply to Federal 

grantees. The circulars supplement the 

requirements of this section for 

accounting systems and financial 

record-keeping and provide additional 

guidance on how these requirements 

may be satisfied. (Circulars may be 

obtained on the OMB Web site at 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb.) 

1. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–21, Cost Principles 

for Educational Institutions. 

2. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–87, Cost Principles 

for State and Local Governments. 

3. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–88, Indirect Cost 

Rates, Audit and Audit Follow-up at 

Educational Institutions. 

4. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–102, Uniform 

Administrative Requirements for 

Grants-in-Aid to State and Local 

Governments. 

5. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–110, Grants and 

Agreements with Institutions of Higher 

Education, Hospitals and Other NonProfit Organizations. 

6. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–122, Cost Principles 

for Non-profit Organizations. 

7. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–128, Audits of State 

and Local Governments. 

8. Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) Circular A–133, Audits of 

Institutions of Higher Education and 

Other Non-profit Institutions. 

C. Supervision and Monitoring 

Responsibilities 

1. Grantee Responsibilities 

All grantees receiving awards from 

the Institute are responsible for the 

management and fiscal control of all 

funds. Responsibilities include 

accounting for receipts and 

expenditures, maintaining adequate 

financial records, and refunding 

expenditures disallowed by audits. 

2. Responsibilities of State Supreme 

Court 

a. Each application for funding from 

a State or local court must be approved, 

consistent with State law, by the State’s 

Supreme Court, or its designated agency 

or council (see section III.F.). 

b. The State Supreme Court or its 

designee shall receive all Institute funds 

awarded to such courts; be responsible 

for assuring proper administration of 

Institute funds; and be responsible for 

all aspects of the project, including 

proper accounting and financial recordkeeping by the subgrantee. These 

responsibilities include: 

(1) Reviewing Financial Operations. 

The State Supreme Court or its designee 

should be familiar with, and 

periodically monitor, its subgrantees’

financial operations, records system, 

and procedures. Particular attention 

should be directed to the maintenance 

of current financial data. 

(2) Recording Financial Activities. 

The subgrantee’s grant award or contract 

obligation, as well as cash advances and 

other financial activities, should be 

recorded in the financial records of the 

State Supreme Court or its designee in 

summary form. Subgrantee expenditures 

should be recorded on the books of the 

State Supreme Court OR evidenced by 

report forms duly filed by the 

subgrantee. Matching contributions 

provided by subgrantees should 

likewise be recorded, as should any 

project income resulting from program 

operations. 

(3) Budgeting and Budget Review. The 

State Supreme Court or its designee 

should ensure that each subgrantee 

prepares an adequate budget as the basis 

for its award commitment. The State 

Supreme Court should maintain the 

details of each project budget on file. 

(4) Accounting for Match. The State 

Supreme Court or its designee will 

ensure that subgrantees comply with the 

match requirements specified in this 

Guideline (see section VIII.A.8.). 

(5) Audit Requirement. The State 

Supreme Court or its designee is 

required to ensure that subgrantees meet 

the necessary audit requirements set 

forth by the Institute (see sections K. 

below and VIII.A.3.). 

(6) Reporting Irregularities. The State 

Supreme Court, its designees, and its 

subgrantees are responsible for 

promptly reporting to the Institute the 

nature and circumstances surrounding 

any financial irregularities discovered. 

D. Accounting System 

The grantee is responsible for 

establishing and maintaining an 

adequate system of accounting and 

internal controls and for ensuring that 

an adequate system exists for each of its 

subgrantees and contractors. An 

acceptable and adequate accounting 

system: 

1. Properly accounts for receipt of 

funds under each grant awarded and the 

expenditure of funds for each grant by 

category of expenditure (including 

matching contributions and project 

income); 

2. Assures that expended funds are 

applied to the appropriate budget 

category included within the approved 

grant; 

3. Presents and classifies historical 

costs of the grant as required for 

budgetary and evaluation purposes; 

4. Provides cost and property controls 

to assure optimal use of grant funds; 

5. Is integrated with a system of 

internal controls adequate to safeguard 

the funds and assets covered, check the 

accuracy and reliability of the 

accounting data, promote operational 

efficiency, and assure conformance with 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72529 

any general or special conditions of the 

grant; 

6. Meets the prescribed requirements 

for periodic financial reporting of 

operations; and 

7. Provides financial data for 

planning, control, measurement, and 

evaluation of direct and indirect costs. 

E. Total Cost Budgeting and Accounting 

Accounting for all funds awarded by 

the Institute must be structured and 

executed on a TOTAL PROJECT COST 

basis. That is, total project costs, 

including Institute funds, State and 

local matching shares, and any other 

fund sources included in the approved 

project budget serve as the foundation 

for fiscal administration and accounting. 

Grant applications and financial reports 

require budget and cost estimates on the 

basis of total costs. 

1. Timing of Matching Contributions 

Matching contributions need not be 

applied at the exact time of the 

obligation of Institute funds. Ordinarily, 

the full matching share must be 

obligated during the award period; 

however, with the written permission of 

the Institute, contributions made 

following approval of the grant by the 

Institute’s Board of Directors but before 

the beginning of the grant may be 

counted as match. Grantees that do not 

contemplate making matching 

contributions continuously throughout 

the course of a project, or on a task-bytask basis, are required to submit a 

schedule within 30 days after the 

beginning of the project period 

indicating at what points during the 

project period the matching 

contributions will be made. If a 

proposed cash or in-kind match is not 

fully met, the Institute may reduce the 

award amount accordingly to maintain 

the ratio of grant funds to matching 

funds stated in the award agreement. 

2. Records for Match 

All grantees must maintain records 

that clearly show the source, amount, 

and timing of all matching 

contributions. In addition, if a project 

has included, within its approved 

budget, contributions which exceed the 

required matching portion, the grantee 

must maintain records of those 

contributions in the same manner as it 

does Institute funds and required 

matching shares. For all grants made to 

State and local courts, the State 

Supreme Court has primary 

responsibility for grantee/subgrantee 

compliance with the requirements of 

this section (see section IX.C.2. above). 

F. Maintenance and Retention of 

Records 

All financial records, including 

supporting documents, statistical 

records, and all other information 

pertinent to grants, subgrants, 

cooperative agreements, or contracts 

under grants, must be retained by each 

organization participating in a project 

for at least three years for purposes of 

examination and audit. State Supreme 

Courts may impose record retention and 

maintenance requirements in addition 

to those prescribed in this section. 

1. Coverage 

The retention requirement extends to 

books of original entry, source 

documents supporting accounting 

transactions, the general ledger, 

subsidiary ledgers, personnel and 

payroll records, canceled checks, and 

related documents and records. Source 

documents include copies of all grant 

and subgrant awards, applications, and 

required grantee/subgrantee financial 

and narrative reports. Personnel and 

payroll records shall include the time 

and attendance reports for all 

individuals reimbursed under a grant, 

subgrant or contract, whether they are 

employed full-time or part-time. Time 

and effort reports are required for 

consultants. 

2. Retention Period 

The three-year retention period starts 

from the date of the submission of the 

final expenditure report. 

3. Maintenance 

Grantees and subgrantees are 

expected to see that records of different 

fiscal years are separately identified and 

maintained so that requested 

information can be readily located. 

Grantees and subgrantees are also 

obligated to protect records adequately 

against fire or other damage. When 

records are stored away from the 

grantee’s/subgrantee’s principal office, a 

written index of the location of stored 

records should be on hand, and ready 

access should be assured. 

4. Access 

Grantees and subgrantees must give 

any authorized representative of the 

Institute access to and the right to 

examine all records, books, papers, and 

documents related to an Institute grant. 

G. Project-Related Income 

Records of the receipt and disposition 

of project-related income must be 

maintained by the grantee in the same 

manner as required for the project funds 

that gave rise to the income and must be 

reported to the Institute (see section 

IX.H.2. below). The policies governing 

the disposition of the various types of 

project-related income are listed below. 

1. Interest 

A State and any agency or 

instrumentality of a State, including 

institutions of higher education and 

hospitals, shall not be held accountable 

for interest earned on advances of 

project funds. When funds are awarded 

to subgrantees through a State, the 

subgrantees are not held accountable for 

interest earned on advances of project 

funds. Local units of government and 

nonprofit organizations that are grantees 

must refund any interest earned. 

Grantees shall ensure minimum 

balances in their respective grant cash 

accounts. 

2. Royalties 

The grantee/subgrantee may retain all 

royalties received from copyrights or 

other works developed under projects or 

from patents and inventions, unless the 

terms and conditions of the grant 

provide otherwise. 

3. Registration and Tuition Fees 

Registration and tuition fees may be 

considered as cash match with the prior 

written approval of the Institute. 

Estimates of registration and tuition 

fees, and any expenses to be offset by 

the fees, should be included in the 

application budget forms and narrative. 

4. Income from the Sale of Grant 

Products 

If the sale of products occurs during 

the project period, the income may be 

treated as cash match with the prior 

written approval of the Institute. The 

costs and income generated by the sales 

must be reported on the Quarterly 

Financial Status Reports and 

documented in an auditable manner. 

Whenever possible, the intent to sell a 

product should be disclosed in the 

application or reported to the Institute 

in writing once a decision to sell 

products has been made. The grantee 

must request approval to recover its 

product development, reproduction, 

and dissemination costs as specified in 

section VIII.A.11.b. 

5. Other 

Other project income shall be treated 

in accordance with disposition 

instructions set forth in the grant’s terms 

and conditions. 

72530 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

H. Payments and Financial Reporting 

Requirements 

1. Payment of Grant Funds 

The procedures and regulations set 

forth below are applicable to all 

Institute grant funds and grantees. 

a. Request for Advance or 

Reimbursement of Funds. Grantees will 

receive funds on a ‘‘check-issued’’ basis. 

Upon receipt, review, and approval of a 

Request for Advance or Reimbursement 

by the Institute, a check will be issued 

directly to the grantee or its designated 

fiscal agent. A request must be limited 

to the grantee’s immediate cash needs. 

The Request for Advance or 

Reimbursement, along with the 

instructions for its preparation, will be 

included in the official Institute award 

package. 

b. Continuation Grants. For purposes 

of submitting Requests for Advance or 

Reimbursement, recipients of 

continuation grants should treat each 

grant as a new project and number the 

requests accordingly (i.e., on a grant 

rather than a project basis). For 

example, the first request for payment 

from a continuation grant would be 

number 1, the second number 2, etc. 

c. Termination of Advance and 

Reimbursement Funding. When a 

grantee organization receiving cash 

advances from the Institute: 

(1) Demonstrates an unwillingness or 

inability to attain program or project 

goals, or to establish procedures that 

will minimize the time elapsing 

between cash advances and 

disbursements, or cannot adhere to 

guideline requirements or special 

conditions; 

(2) Engages in the improper award 

and administration of subgrants or 

contracts; or 

(3) Is unable to submit reliable and/ 

or timely reports; the Institute may 

terminate advance financing and require 

the grantee organization to finance its 

operations with its own working capital. 

Payments to the grantee shall then be 

made by check to reimburse the grantee 

for actual cash disbursements. In the 

event the grantee continues to be 

deficient, the Institute may suspend 

reimbursement payments until the 

deficiencies are corrected. In extreme 

cases, grants may be terminated. 

d. Principle of Minimum Cash on 

Hand. Grantees should request funds 

based upon immediate disbursement 

requirements. Grantees should time 

their requests to ensure that cash on 

hand is the minimum needed for 

disbursements to be made immediately 

or within a few days. 

2. Financial Reporting 

a. General Requirements. To obtain 

financial information concerning the 

use of funds, the Institute requires that 

grantees/subgrantees submit timely 

reports for review. 

b. Due Dates and Contents. A 

Financial Status Report is required from 

all grantees, other than scholarship 

recipients, for each active quarter on a 

calendar-quarter basis. This report is 

due within 30 days after the close of the 

calendar quarter. It is designed to 

provide financial information relating to 

Institute funds, State and local matching 

shares, project income, and any other 

sources of funds for the project, as well 

as information on obligations and 

outlays. A copy of the Financial Status 

Report, along with instructions for its 

preparation, is included in each official 

Institute Award package. If a grantee 

requests substantial payments for a 

project prior to the completion of a 

given quarter, the Institute may request 

a brief summary of the amount 

requested, by object class, to support the 

Request for Advance or Reimbursement. 

c. Additional Requirements for 

Continuation Grants. Grantees receiving 

continuation grants should number their 

quarterly Financial Status Reports on a 

grant rather than a project basis. For 

example, the first quarterly report for a 

continuation grant award should be 

number 1, the second number 2, etc. 

3. Consequences of Non-Compliance 

with Submission Requirement 

Failure of the grantee to submit 

required financial and progress reports 

may result in suspension or termination 

of grant payments. 

I. Allowability of Costs 

1. General 

Except as may be otherwise provided 

in the conditions of a particular grant, 

cost allowability is determined in 

accordance with the principles set forth 

in OMB Circulars A–21, Cost Principles 

Applicable to Grants and Contracts with 

Educational Institutions; A–87, Cost 

Principles for State and Local 

Governments; and A–122, Cost 

Principles for Non-profit Organizations. 

No costs may be recovered to liquidate 

obligations incurred after the approved 

grant period. Circulars may be obtained 

on the OMB Web site at 

www.whitehouse.gov/omb. 

2. Costs Requiring Prior Approval 

a. Pre-agreement Costs. The written 

prior approval of the Institute is 

required for costs considered necessary 

but which occur prior to the start date 

of the project period. 

b. Equipment. Grant funds may be 

used to purchase or lease only that 

equipment essential to accomplishing 

the goals and objectives of the project. 

The written prior approval of the 

Institute is required when the amount of 

automated data processing (ADP) 

equipment to be purchased or leased 

exceeds $10,000 or software to be 

purchased exceeds $3,000. 

c. Consultants. The written prior 

approval of the Institute is required 

when the rate of compensation to be 

paid a consultant exceeds $300 a day. 

Institute funds may not be used to pay 

a consultant more than $900 per day. 

d. Budget Revisions. Budget revisions 

among direct cost categories that (i) 

transfer grant funds to an unbudgeted 

cost category or (ii) individually or 

cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) 

of the approved original budget or the 

most recently approved revised budget 

require prior Institute approval (see 

section X.A.1.). 

3. Travel Costs 

Transportation and per diem rates 

must comply with the policies of the 

grantee. If the grantee does not have an 

established written travel policy, then 

travel rates must be consistent with 

those established by the Institute or the 

Federal Government. Institute funds 

may not be used to cover the 

transportation or per diem costs of a 

member of a national organization to 

attend an annual or other regular 

meeting of that organization. 

4. Indirect Costs 

These are costs of an organization that 

are not readily assignable to a particular 

project but are necessary to the 

operation of the organization and the 

performance of the project. The cost of 

operating and maintaining facilities, 

depreciation, and administrative 

salaries are examples of the types of 

costs that are usually treated as indirect 

costs. Although the Institute’s policy 

requires all costs to be budgeted 

directly, it will accept indirect costs if 

a grantee has an indirect cost rate 

approved by a Federal agency as set 

forth below. However, recoverable 

indirect costs are limited to no more 

than 75% of a grantee’s direct personnel 

costs (salaries plus fringe benefits) (see 

sections III.L. and VI.A.4.d.(11)). 

a. Approved Plan Available. 

(1) A copy of an indirect cost rate 

agreement or allocation plan approved 

for a grantee during the preceding two 

years by any Federal granting agency on 

the basis of allocation methods 

substantially in accord with those set 

forth in the applicable cost circulars 

must be submitted to the Institute. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72531 

(2) Where flat rates are accepted in 

lieu of actual indirect costs, grantees 

may not also charge expenses normally 

included in overhead pools, e.g., 

accounting services, legal services, 

building occupancy and maintenance, 

etc., as direct costs. 

b. Establishment of Indirect Cost 

Rates. To be reimbursed for indirect 

costs, a grantee must first establish an 

appropriate indirect cost rate. To do 

this, the grantee must prepare an 

indirect cost rate proposal and submit it 

to the Institute within three months 

after the start of the grant period to 

assure recovery of the full amount of 

allowable indirect costs. The rate must 

be developed in accordance with 

principles and procedures appropriate 

to the type of grantee institution 

involved as specified in the applicable 

OMB Circular. 

c. No Approved Plan. If an indirect 

cost proposal for recovery of indirect 

costs is not submitted to the Institute 

within three months after the start of the 

grant period, indirect costs will be 

irrevocably disallowed for all months 

prior to the month that the indirect cost 

proposal is received. 

J. Procurement and Property 

Management Standards 

1. Procurement Standards 

For State and local governments, the 

Institute has adopted the standards set 

forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular 

A–102. Institutions of higher education, 

hospitals, and other non-profit 

organizations will be governed by the 

standards set forth in Attachment O of 

OMB Circular A–110. 

2. Property Management Standards 

The property management standards 

as prescribed in Attachment N of OMB 

Circulars A–102 and A–110 apply to all 

Institute grantees and subgrantees 

except as provided in section VIII.A.18. 

All grantees/subgrantees are required to 

be prudent in the acquisition and 

management of property with grant 

funds. If suitable property required for 

the successful execution of projects is 

already available within the grantee or 

subgrantee organization, expenditures of 

grant funds for the acquisition of new 

property will be considered 

unnecessary. 

K. Audit Requirements 

1. Implementation 

Each recipient of a Project or 

Continuation Grant must provide for an 

annual fiscal audit. This requirement 

also applies to a State or local court 

receiving a subgrant from the State 

Supreme Court. The audit may be of the 

entire grantee or subgrantee 

organization or of the specific project 

funded by the Institute. Audits 

conducted in accordance with the 

Single Audit Act of 1984 and OMB 

Circular A–128, or OMB Circular A–133, 

will satisfy the requirement for an 

annual fiscal audit. The audit must be 

conducted by an independent Certified 

Public Accountant, or a State or local 

agency authorized to audit government 

agencies. Grantees must send two copies 

of the audit report to the Institute. 

Grantees that receive funds from a 

Federal agency and satisfy audit 

requirements of the cognizant Federal 

agency must submit two copies of the 

audit report prepared for that Federal 

agency to the Institute in order to satisfy 

the provisions of this section. 

2. Resolution and Clearance of Audit 

Reports 

Timely action on recommendations 

by responsible management officials is 

an integral part of the effectiveness of an 

audit. Each grantee must have policies 

and procedures for acting on audit 

recommendations by designating 

officials responsible for: follow-up; 

maintaining a record of the actions 

taken on recommendations and time 

schedules; responding to and acting on 

audit recommendations; and submitting 

periodic reports to the Institute on 

recommendations and actions taken. 

3. Consequences of Non-Resolution of 

Audit Issues 

Ordinarily, the Institute will not make 

a subsequent grant award to an 

applicant that has an unresolved audit 

report involving Institute awards. 

Failure of the grantee to resolve audit 

questions may also result in the 

suspension or termination of payments 

for active Institute grants to that 

organization. 

L. Close-Out of Grants 

1. Grantee Close-Out Requirements 

Within 90 days after the end date of 

the grant or any approved extension 

thereof (see section IX.L.2. below), the 

following documents must be submitted 

to the Institute by grantees (other than 

scholarship recipients): 

a. Financial Status Report. The final 

report of expenditures must have no 

unliquidated obligations and must 

indicate the exact balance of 

unobligated funds. Any unobligated/ 

unexpended funds will be deobligated 

from the award by the Institute. Final 

payment requests for obligations 

incurred during the award period must 

be submitted to the Institute prior to the 

end of the 90-day close-out period. 

Grantees on a check-issued basis, who 

have drawn down funds in excess of 

their obligations/expenditures, must 

return any unused funds as soon as it is 

determined that the funds are not 

required. In no case should any unused 

funds remain with the grantee beyond 

the submission date of the final 

Financial Status Report. 

b. Final Progress Report. This report 

should describe the project activities 

during the final calendar quarter of the 

project and the close-out period, 

including to whom project products 

have been disseminated; provide a 

summary of activities during the entire 

project; specify whether all the 

objectives set forth in the approved 

application or an approved adjustment 

have been met and, if any of the 

objectives have not been met, explain 

why not; and discuss what, if anything, 

could have been done differently that 

might have enhanced the impact of the 

project or improved its operation. 

These reporting requirements apply at 

the conclusion of every grant other than 

a scholarship, even when the project 

will continue under a Continuation 

Grant. 

2. Extension of Close-Out Period 

Upon the written request of the 

grantee, the Institute may extend the 

close-out period to assure completion of 

the grantee’s close-out requirements. A 

request for an extension must be 

received by the Institute at least 14 days 

before the end of the close-out period 

and must explain why the extension is 

necessary and what steps will be taken 

to assure that all the grantee’s 

responsibilities will be met by the end 

of the extension period. If a grantee fails 

to submit a request for extension in a 

timely manner, or such request is 

denied, the Institute will not, under any 

circumstances, accept requests for 

payment after the 90-day close-out 

period, even for costs legitimately 

incurred and properly documented 

during the project period. 

X. Grant Adjustments 

All requests for programmatic or 

budgetary adjustments requiring 

Institute approval must be submitted by 

the project director in a timely manner 

(ordinarily 30 days prior to the 

implementation of the adjustment being 

requested). All requests for changes 

from the approved application will be 

carefully reviewed for both consistency 

with this Guideline and the 

enhancement of grant goals and 

objectives. Failure to submit 

adjustments in a timely manner may 

result in the termination of a grantee’s 

award. 

72532 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

A. Grant Adjustments Requiring Prior 

Written Approval 

The following grant adjustments 

require the prior written approval of the 

Institute: 

1. Budget revisions among direct cost 

categories that (a) transfer grant funds to 

an unbudgeted cost category or (b) 

individually or cumulatively exceed 

five percent (5%) of the approved 

original budget or the most recently 

approved revised budget (see section 

IX.I.2.d.). 

For Continuation Grants, funds from 

the original award may be used during 

the new grant period and funds awarded 

through a continuation grant may be 

used to cover project-related 

expenditures incurred during the 

original award period, with the prior 

written approval of the Institute. 

2. A change in the scope of work to 

be performed or the objectives of the 

project (see D. below in this section). 

3. A change in the project site. 

4. A change in the project period, 

such as an extension of the grant period 

and/or extension of the final financial or 

progress report deadline (see E. below). 

5. Satisfaction of special conditions, if 

required. 

6. A change in or temporary absence 

of the project director (see F. and G. 

below). 

7. The assignment of an employee or 

consultant to a key staff position whose 

qualifications were not described in the 

application, or a change of a person 

assigned to a key project staff position 

(see section VIII.A.2.). 

8. A change in or temporary absence 

of the person responsible for managing 

and reporting on the grant’s finances. 

9. A change in the name of the grantee 

organization. 

10. A transfer or contracting out of 

grant-supported activities (see H. 

below). 

11. A transfer of the grant to another 

recipient. 

12. Preagreement costs (see section 

IX.I.2.a.). 

13. The purchase of automated data 

processing equipment and software (see 

section IX.I.2.b.). 

14. Consultant rates (see section 

IX.I.2.c.). 

15. A change in the nature or number 

of the products to be prepared or the 

manner in which a product would be 

distributed. 

B. Requests for Grant Adjustments 

All grantees must promptly notify 

their SJI program managers, in writing, 

of events or proposed changes that may 

require adjustments to the approved 

project design. In requesting an 

adjustment, the grantee must set forth 

the reasons and basis for the proposed 

adjustment and any other information 

the program manager determines would 

help the Institute’s review. 

C. Notification of Approval/Disapproval 

If the request is approved, the grantee 

will be sent a Grant Adjustment signed 

by the Executive Director or his or her 

designee. If the request is denied, the 

grantee will be sent a written 

explanation of the reasons for the 

denial. 

D. Changes in the Scope of the Grant 

Major changes in scope, duration, 

training methodology, or other 

significant areas must be approved in 

advance by the Institute. A grantee may 

make minor changes in methodology, 

approach, or other aspects of the grant 

to expedite achievement of the grant’s 

objectives with subsequent notification 

of the SJI program manager. 

E. Date Changes 

A request to change or extend the 

grant period must be made at least 30 

days in advance of the end date of the 

grant. A revised task plan should 

accompany a request for a no-cost 

extension of the grant period, along with 

a revised budget if shifts among budget 

categories will be needed. A request to 

change or extend the deadline for the 

final financial report or final progress 

report must be made at least 14 days in 

advance of the report deadline (see 

section IX.L.2.). 

F. Temporary Absence of the Project 

Director 

Whenever an absence of the project 

director is expected to exceed a 

continuous period of one month, the 

plans for the conduct of the project 

director’s duties during such absence 

must be approved in advance by the 

Institute. This information must be 

provided in a letter signed by an 

authorized representative of the grantee/ 

subgrantee at least 30 days before the 

departure of the project director, or as 

soon as it is known that the project 

director will be absent. The grant may 

be terminated if arrangements are not 

approved in advance by the Institute. 

G. Withdrawal of/Change in Project 

Director 

If the project director relinquishes or 

expects to relinquish active direction of 

the project, the Institute must be 

notified immediately. In such cases, if 

the grantee/subgrantee wishes to 

terminate the project, the Institute will 

forward procedural instructions upon 

notification of such intent. If the grantee 

wishes to continue the project under the 

direction of another individual, a 

statement of the candidate’s 

qualifications should be sent to the 

Institute for review and approval. The 

grant may be terminated if the 

qualifications of the proposed 

individual are not approved in advance 

by the Institute. 

H. Transferring or Contracting Out of 

Grant-Supported Activities 

No principal activity of a grantsupported project may be transferred or 

contracted out to another organization 

without specific prior approval by the 

Institute. All such arrangements must be 

formalized in a contract or other written 

agreement between the parties involved. 

Copies of the proposed contract or 

agreement must be submitted for prior 

approval of the Institute at the earliest 

possible time. The contract or agreement 

must state, at a minimum, the activities 

to be performed, the time schedule, the 

policies and procedures to be followed, 

the dollar limitation of the agreement, 

and the cost principles to be followed in 

determining what costs, both direct and 

indirect, will be allowed. The contract 

or other written agreement must not 

affect the grantee’s overall responsibility 

for the direction of the project and 

accountability to the Institute. 

State Justice Institute Board of 

Directors 

Robert A. Miller, Chairman, Chief 

Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of South 

Dakota, Pierre, SD. 

Joseph F. Baca, Vice-Chairman, Chief 

Justice (ret.), New Mexico Supreme 

Court, Albuquerque, NM. 

Sandra A. O’Connor, Secretary, State’s 

Attorney of Baltimore County, 

Towson, MD. 

Keith McNamara, Esq., Executive 

Committee Member, McNamara & 

McNamara, Columbus, OH. 

Terrence B. Adamson, Esq., Executive 

Vice-President, The National 

Geographic Society, Washington, DC. 

Robert N. Baldwin, Executive Vice 

President and General Counsel, 

National Center for State Courts, 

Richmond, VA. 

Carlos R. Garza, Esq., Administrative 

Judge (ret.), Round Rock, TX. 

Sophia H. Hall, Administrative 

Presiding Judge, Circuit Court of Cook 

County, Chicago, IL. 

Tommy Jewell, Presiding Children’s 

Court Judge (ret.), Albuquerque, NM. 

Arthur A. McGiverin, Chief Justice (ret.), 

Supreme Court of Iowa, Ottumwa, IA. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72533 

Kevin Linskey, Executive Director (ex 

officio). 

Kevin Linskey, 

Executive Director. 

Appendix A—SJI Libraries: Designated 

Sites and Contacts 

Alabama 

Supreme Court Library 

Mr. Timothy A. Lewis 

State Law Librarian 

Alabama Supreme Court 

Judicial Building 

300 Dexter Avenue 

Montgomery, AL 36104 

(334) 242–4347 

director@alalinc.net 

Alaska 

Anchorage Law Library 

Ms. Cynthia S. Fellows 

State Law Librarian 

Alaska State Court Law Library 

303 K Street 

Anchorage, AK 99501 

(907) 264–0583 

cfellows@courts.state.ak.us 

Arizona 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Lani Orosco 

Staff Assistant 

Arizona Supreme Court 

Staff Attorney’s Office 

Library 

1501 W. Washington, Suite 445 

Phoenix, AZ 85007 

(602) 542–5028 

lorosco@supreme.sp.state.az.us 

Arkansas 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Mr. James D. Gingerich 

Director 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Supreme Court of Arkansas 

Justice Building 

625 Marshall Street 

Little Rock, AR 72201 

(501) 682–9400 

jd.gingerich@mail.state.ar.us 

California 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Mr. William C. Vickrey 

Administrative Director of the Courts 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

455 Golden Gate Avenue 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

(415) 865–4235 

william.vickrey@jud.ca.gov 

Colorado 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Linda Gruenthal 

Deputy Supreme Court Law Librarian 

2 East 14th Avenue 

Denver, CO 80203 

(303) 837–3720 

cscltech@state.co.us 

Connecticut 

State Library 

Ms. Denise D. Jernigan 

Law Librarian 

Connecticut State Library 

231 Capitol Avenue 

Hartford, CT 06106 

(860) 757–6598 

djernigan@cslib.org 

Delaware 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Mr. Michael E. McLaughlin 

Deputy Director 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Carvel State Office Building 

820 North French Street 

11th Floor 

P.O. Box 8911 

Wilmington, DE 19801 

(302) 577–8481 

michael.mclaughlin@state.de.us 

District of Columbia 

Executive Office, District of Columbia Courts 

Ms. Anne B. Wicks 

Executive Officer 

District of Columbia Courts 

500 Indiana Avenue, NW., Suite 1500 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

(202) 879–1700 

Wicksab@dcsc.gov 

Florida 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Ms. Elisabeth H. Goodner 

State Courts Administrator 

Office of the State Courts Administrator 

Florida Supreme Court 

Supreme Court Building 

500 South Duval Street 

Tallahassee, FL 32399 

(850) 922–5081 

goodnerl@flcourts.org 

Georgia 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Mr. David Ratley 

Director 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

244 Washington Street, SW., Suite 300 

Atlanta, GA 30334 

(404) 656–5171 

ratleydl@gaaoc.us 

Hawaii 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Ann Koto 

State Law Librarian 

The Supreme Court Law Library 

417 South King St., Room 119 

Honolulu, HI 96813 

(808) 539–4964 

Ann.S.Koto@courts.state.hi.us 

Idaho 

AOC Judicial Education Library/State Law 

Library 

Mr. Richard Visser 

State Law Librarian 

Idaho State Law Library 

Supreme Court Building 

451 West State St. 

Boise, ID 83720 

(208) 334–3316 

lawlibrary@isc.state.id.us 

Illinois 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Brenda Larison 

Supreme Court of Illinois Library 

200 East Capitol Avenue 

Springfield, IL 62701–1791 

(217) 782–2425 

blarison@court.state.il.us 

Indiana 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Terri L. Ross 

Supreme Court Librarian 

Supreme Court Library 

State House, Room 316 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

(317) 232–2557 

tross@courts.state.in.us 

Iowa 

Administrative Office of the Court 

Dr. Jerry K. Beatty 

Director of Judicial Branch Education 

Iowa Judicial Branch 

Iowa Judicial Branch Building 

1111 East Court Avenue 

Des Moines, IA 50319 

(515) 242–0190 

jerry.beatty@jb.state.ia.us 

Kansas 

Supreme Court Library 

Mr. Fred Knecht 

Law Librarian 

Kansas Supreme Court Library 

Kansas Judicial Center 

301 SW. 10th Avenue 

Topeka, KS 66612 

(785) 296–3257 

knechtf@kscourts.org 

Kentucky 

State Law Library 

Ms. Vida Vitagliano 

Cataloging and Research Librarian 

Kentucky Supreme Court Library 

700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 200 

Frankfort, KY 40601 

(502) 564–4185 

vidavitagliano@mail.aoc.state.ky.us 

Louisiana 

State Law Library 

Ms. Carol Billings 

Director 

Louisiana Law Library 

Louisiana Supreme Court Building 

400 Royal Street 

New Orleans, LA 70130 

(504) 310–2401 

cbillings@lasc.org 

Maine 

State Law and Legislative Reference Library 

Ms. Lynn E. Randall 

State Law Librarian 

43 State House Station 

Augusta, ME 04333 

(207) 287–1600 

72534 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

lynn.randall@legislature.maine.gov 

Maryland 

State Law Library 

Mr. Steve Anderson 

Director 

Maryland State Law Library 

Court of Appeal Building 

361 Rowe Boulevard 

Annapolis, MD 21401 

(410) 260–1430 

steve.anderson@courts.state.md.us 

Massachusetts 

Middlesex Law Library 

Ms. Linda Hom 

Librarian 

Middlesex Law Library 

Superior Court House 

40 Thorndike Street 

Cambridge, MA 02141 

(617) 494–4148 

midlawlib@yahoo.com 

Michigan 

Michigan Judicial Institute 

Dawn F. McCarty 

Director 

Michigan Judicial Institute 

P.O. Box 30205 

Lansing, MI 48909 

(517) 373–7509 

mccartyd@courts.mi.gov 

Minnesota 

State Law Library (Minnesota Judicial Center) 

Ms. Barbara L. Golden 

State Law Librarian 

G25 Minnesota Judicial Center 

25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 

St. Paul, MN 55155 

(612) 297–2089 

barb.golden@courts.state.mn.us 

Mississippi 

Mississippi Judicial College 

Hon. Leslie G. Johnson 

Executive Director 

Mississippi Judicial College 

P.O. Box 8850 

University, MS 38677 

(662) 915–5955 

lwleslie@olemiss.edu 

Montana 

State Law Library 

Ms. Judith Meadows 

State Law Librarian 

State Law Library of Montana 

P.O. Box 203004 

Helena, MT 59620 

(406) 444–3660 

jmeadows@state.mt.us 

Nebraska 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Mr. Philip D. Gould, Director 

Judicial Branch Education 

Administrative Office of the Courts/Probation 

521 South 14th St., Suite 200 

Lincoln, NE 68508–2707 

(402) 471–3072 (office)/(402)471–3071 (fax) 

pgould@nsc.state.ne.us 

Nevada 

To be determined—

New Hampshire 

New Hampshire Law Library 

Ms. Mary Searles 

Technical Services Law Librarian 

New Hampshire Law Library 

Supreme Court Building 

One Noble Drive 

Concord, NH 03301–6160 

(603) 271–3777 

msearles@courts.state.nh.us 

New Jersey 

New Jersey State Library 

Mr. Thomas O’Malley 

Supervising Law Librarian 

New Jersey State Law Library 

185 West State Street 

P.O. Box 520 

Trenton, NJ 08625–0250 

(609) 292–6230 

tomalley@njstatelib.org 

New Mexico 

Supreme Court Library 

Mr. Thaddeus Bejnar 

Librarian 

Supreme Court Library 

Post Office Drawer L 

Santa Fe, NM 87504 

(505) 827–4850 

New York 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Barbara Briggs 

Law Librarian 

Syracuse Supreme Court Law Library 

401 Montgomery Street 

Syracuse, NY 13202 

(315) 671–1150 

bbriggs@courts.state.ny.us 

North Carolina 

Supreme Court Library 

Mr. Thomas P. Davis 

Librarian 

North Carolina Supreme Court Library 

500 Justice Building 

2 East Morgan Street 

Raleigh, NC 27601 

(919) 733–3425 

tpd@sc.state.nc.us 

North Dakota 

Supreme Court Library 

Ms. Marcella Kramer 

Assistant Law Librarian 

Supreme Court Law Library 

600 East Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 182 

2nd Floor, Judicial Wing 

Bismarck, ND 58505–0540 

(701) 328–2229 

mkramer@ndcourts.com 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Supreme Court of the Northern Mariana 

Islands 

Ms. Margarita M. Palacios 

Director of Courts 

Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands 

P.O. Box 502165 

Saipan, MP 96950 

(670) 235–9700 

supremecourt@saipan.com 

Ohio 

Supreme Court Library 

Mr. Ken Kozlowski 

Director 

Law Library 

Supreme Court of Ohio 

65 South Front Street, 11th Floor 

Columbus, OH 43215–3431 

(614) 387–9666 

kozlowsk@sconet.state.oh.us 

Oklahoma 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

State Court Administrator 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

1915 North Stiles Avenue, Suite 305 

Oklahoma City, OK 73105 

(405) 521–2450 

Oregon 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Ms. Kingsley W. Click 

State Court Administrator 

Oregon Judicial Department 

Supreme Court Building 

1163 State Street 

Salem, OR 97301 

(503) 986–5500 

kingsley.w.click@ojd.state.or.us 

Pennsylvania 

State Library of Pennsylvania 

Ms. Barbara Miller 

Collection Management Librarian 

State Library of Pennsylvania 

Bureau of State Library 

333 Market Street 

Harrisburg, PA 17126–1745 

(717) 787–5718 

barbmiller@state.pa.us 

Puerto Rico 

Office of Court Administration 

Alfredo Rivera-Mendoza, Esq. 

Director, Area of Planning and Management 

Office of Court Administration 

P.O. Box 917 

Hato Rey, PR 00919 

Rhode Island 

Roger Williams University 

Ms. Gail Winson 

Director of Law Library/Associate Professor 

of Law 

Roger Williams University 

School of Law Library 

10 Metacom Avenue 

Bristol, RI 02809 

401/254–4531 

gwinson@law.rwu.edu 

South Carolina 

Coleman Karesh Law Library (University of 

South Carolina School of Law) 

Mr. Steve Hinckley 

Director 

Coleman Karesh Law Library 

University of South Carolina 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72535 

Main and Green Streets 

Columbia, SC 29208 

(803) 777–5944 

hinckley@law.sc.edu 

South Dakota 

State Law Library 

Librarian 

South Dakota State Law Library 

500 East Capitol 

Pierre, South Dakota 57501 

(605) 773–4898 

donnis.deyo@ujs.state.sd.ud 

Tennessee 

Tennessee State Law Library 

Hon. Cornelia A. Clark 

Executive Director 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

511 Union Street, Suite 600 

Nashville, TN 37219 

(615) 741–2687 

cclark@tscmail.state.tn.us 

Texas 

State Law Library 

Mr. Marcelino A. Estrada 

Director, State Law Library 

P.O. Box 12367 

Austin, TX 78711 

(512) 463–1722 

tony.estrada@sll.state.tx.us 

U.S. Virgin Islands 

Library of the Territorial Court of the Virgin 

Islands (St. Thomas) 

Librarian 

The Library 

Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands 

Post Office Box 70 

Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas 

Virgin Islands 00804 

Utah 

Utah State Judicial Administration Library 

Ms. Jessica Van Buren 

Utah State Law Library 

450 South State, W–13 

P.O. Box 140220 

Salt Lake City, UT 84114–0220 

(801) 238–7991 

jessicavb@email.utcourts.gov 

Vermont 

Supreme Court of Vermont 

Mr. Paul J. Donovan 

Law Librarian 

Vermont Department of Libraries 

109 State Street 

Pavilion Office Building 

Montpelier, VT 05609 

(802) 828–3268 

paul.donovan@dol.state.vt.us 

Virginia 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Ms. Gail Warren 

State Law Librarian 

Virginia State Law Library 

Supreme Court of Virginia 

100 North Ninth Street, 2nd Floor 

Richmond, VA 23219–2335 

(804) 786–2075 

gwarren@courts.state.va.us 

Washington 

Washington State Law Library 

Ms. Kay Newman 

State Law Librarian 

Washington State Law Library 

Temple of Justice 

P.O. Box 40751 

Olympia, WA 98504–0751 

(360) 357–2136 

kay.newman@courts.wa.gov 

West Virginia 

Supreme Court of Appeals Library 

Ms. Kaye Maerz 

State Law Librarian 

West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals 

Library 

1900 Kanawha Boulevard East 

Building 1, Room E–404 

Charleston, WV 25305 

(304) 558–2607 

klm@courts.state.wv.us 

Wisconsin 

State Law Library 

Ms. Jane Colwin 

State Law Librarian 

State Law Library 

120 M.L.K. Jr. Boulevard 

Madison, WI 53703 

(608) 261–2340 

jane.colwin@wicourts.gov 

Wyoming 

Wyoming State Law Library 

Ms. Kathy Carlson 

Law Librarian 

Wyoming State Law Library 

Supreme Court Building 

2301 Capitol Avenue 

Cheyenne, WY 82002 

(307) 777–7509 

kcarls@state.wy.us 

NATIONAL 

American Judicature Society 

Ms. Deborah Sulzbach 

Acquisitions Librarian 

Drake University 

Law Library, Opperman Hall 

2507 University Avenue 

Des Moines, IA 50311–4505 

(515) 271–3784 

e-mail: deborah.sulzbach@drake.edu 

JERITT 

Dr. Maureen E. Conner 

Executive Director 

The JERITT Project 

Michigan State University 

1407 S. Harrison Road 

Suite 330 Nisbet 

East Lansing, MI 48823–5239 

(517) 353–8603 

(517) 432–3965 (fax) 

connerm@msu.edu 

website: http://jeritt.msu.edu 

National Center for State Courts 

Ms. Joan Cochet 

Library Specialist 

National Center for State Courts 

300 Newport Avenue 

Williamsburg, VA 23185–4147 

(757) 259–1826 

library@ncsc.dni.us 

National Judicial College 

Mr. Randall Snyder 

Law Librarian 

National Judicial College 

Judicial College Building, MS 358 

Reno, NV 89557 

(775) 327–8278 

snyder@judges.org 

Appendix B—Illustrative List of 

Technical Assistance Grants 

The following list presents examples of the 

types of technical assistance for which State 

and local courts can request Institute 

funding. Please check with the JERITT 

project (http://jeritt.msu.org or 517/353–

8603) for more information about these and 

other SJI-supported technical assistance 

projects. 

Application of Technology 

Technology Plan (Office of the South 

Dakota State Court Administrator: SJI–99–

066). 

Children and Families in Court 

Expanded Unified Family Court (Ventura 

County, CA, Superior Court: SJI–01–122). 

Trial Court Performance Standards for the 

Unified Family Court of Delaware (Family 

Court of Delaware: SJI–98–205). 

Court Planning, Management, and Financing 

Job Classification and Pay Study of the 

New Hampshire Courts (New Hampshire 

Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI–98–

011). 

A Model for Building and 

Institutionalizing Judicial Branch Strategic 

Planning (12th Judicial Circuit, Sarasota, FL: 

SJI–98–266). 

Strategic Planning (Fourth Judicial District 

Court, Hennepin County, MN: SJI–99–221). 

Differentiated Case Management for the 

Improvement of Civil Case Processing in the 

Trial Courts of Texas (Texas Office of Court 

Administration: SJI–99–222). 

Dispute Resolution and the Courts 

Evaluating the New Mexico Court of 

Appeals Mediation Program (New Mexico 

Supreme Court: SJI–00–122). 

Improving Public Confidence in the Courts 

Mississippi Task Force on Gender Fairness 

in the Courts (Mississippi Administrative 

Office of the Courts: SJI–00–108). 

Analysis of the Juror Debriefing Project 

(King County, WA, Superior Court: SJI–00–

049). 

Improving the Court’s Response to Family 

Violence 

New Hampshire Fatality Reviews (New 

Hampshire Administrative Office of the 

Courts: SJI–99–142). 

Education and Training for Judges and 

Other Court Personnel 

Iowa Supreme Court Advisory Committee 

on Judicial Branch Education (Iowa State 

Court Administrator’s Office: SJI–01–200). 

72536 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 

Appendix C—Illustrative List of Model 

Curricula 

The following list includes examples of 

model SJI-supported curricula that State 

judicial educators may wish to adapt for 

presentation in education programs for 

judges and other court personnel with the 

assistance of a Judicial Branch Education 

Technical Assistance Grant. Please refer to 

section VI.C. for information on submitting a 

letter application for a Judicial Branch 

Education Technical Assistance Grant. A list 

of all SJI-supported education projects is 

available on the SJI Web site (http:// 

www.statejustice.org). Please also check with 

the JERITT project (http://jeritt.msu.edu or 

517/353–8603) and your State SJI-designated 

library (see Appendix A) for more 

information about these and other SJIsupported curricula that may be appropriate 

for in-State adaptation. 

Alternative Dispute Resolution 

Judicial Settlement Manual (National 

Judicial College: SJI–89–089). 

Improving the Quality of Dispute 

Resolution (Ohio State University College of 

Law: SJI–93–277). 

Comprehensive ADR Curriculum for Judges 

(American Bar Association: SJI–95–002). 

Domestic Violence and Custody Mediation 

(American Bar Association: SJI–96–038). 

Court Coordination 

Collaboration: A Training Curriculum to 

Enhance the Effectiveness of Criminal Justice 

Teams (Center for Effective Public Policy: 

SJI–99–039). 

Bankruptcy Issues for State Trial Court 

Judges (American Bankruptcy Institute: SJI–

91–027). 

Intermediate Sanctions Handbook: 

Experiences and Tools for Policymakers 

(Center for Effective Public Policy: IAA–88- 

NIC–001). 

Regional Conference Cookbook: A Practical 

Guide to Planning and Presenting a Regional 

Conference on State-Federal Judicial 

Relationships (U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

9th Circuit: SJI–92–087). 

Bankruptcy Issues and Domestic Relations 

Cases (American Bankruptcy Institute: SJI–

96–175). 

Court Management 

Managing Trials Effectively: A Program for 

State Trial Judges (National Center for State 

Courts/National Judicial College: SJI–87–066/ 

067, SJI–89–054/055, SJI–91–025/026). 

Caseflow Management Principles and 

Practices (Institute for Court Management/ 

National Center for State Courts: SJI–87–056). 

A Manual for Workshops on Processing 

Felony Dispositions in Limited Jurisdiction 

Courts (National Center for State Courts: SJI–

90–052). 

Managerial Budgeting in the Courts; 

Performance Appraisal in the Courts; 

Managing Change in the Courts; Court 

Automation Design; Case Management for 

Trial Judges; Trial Court Performance 

Standards (Institute for Court Management/ 

National Center for State Courts: SJI–91–043). 

Strengthening Rural Courts of Limited 

Jurisdiction and Team Training for Judges 

and Clerks (Rural Justice Center: SJI–90–014, 

SJI–91–082). 

Integrating Trial Management and 

Caseflow Management (Justice Management 

Institute: SJI–93–214). 

Leading Organizational Change (California 

Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI–94–

068). 

Managing Mass Tort Cases (National 

Judicial College: SJI–94–141). 

Employment Responsibilities of State Court 

Judges (National Judicial College: SJI–95–

025). 

Caseflow Management; Resources, Budget, 

and Finance; Visioning and Strategic 

Planning; Leadership; Purposes and 

Responsibilities of Courts; Information 

Management Technology; Human Resources 

Management; Education, Training, and 

Development; Public Information and the 

Media from ‘‘NACM Core Competency 

Curriculum Guidelines’’ (National 

Association for Court Management: SJI–96–

148). 

Dealing with the Common Law Courts: A 

Model Curriculum for Judges and Court Staff 

(Institute for Court Management/ National 

Center for State Courts: SJI–96–159). 

Caseflow Management from ‘‘Innovative 

Educational Programs for Judges and Court 

Managers’’ (Justice Management Institute: 

SJI–98–041). 

Courts and Communities 

Reporting on the Courts and the Law 

(American Judicature Society: SJI–88–014). 

Victim Rights and the Judiciary: A Training 

and Implementation Project (National 

Organization for Victim Assistance: SJI–89–

083). 

National Guardianship Monitoring Project: 

Trainer and Trainee’s Manual (American 

Association of Retired Persons: SJI–91–013). 

Access to Justice: The Impartial Jury and 

the Justice System and When Implementing 

the Court-Related Needs of Older People and 

Persons With Disabilities: An Instructional 

Guide (National Judicial College: SJI–91–

054). 

You Are the Court System: A Focus on 

Customer Service (Alaska Court System: SJI–

94–048). 

Serving the Public: A Curriculum for Court 

Employees (American Judicature Society: 

SJI–96–040). 

Courts and Their Communities: Local 

Planning and the Renewal of Public Trust 

and Confidence: A California Statewide 

Conference (California Administrative Office 

of the Courts: SJI–98–008). 

Charting the Course of Public Trust and 

Confidence in Our Courts (Mid-Atlantic 

Association for Court Management: SJI–98–

208). 

Trial Court Judicial Leadership Program: 

Judges and Court Administrators Serving the 

Courts and Community (National Center for 

State Courts: SJI–98–268). 

Public Trust and Confidence (Arizona 

Courts Association: SJI–99–063). 

Diversity, Values, and Attitudes 

Troubled Families, Troubled Judges 

(Brandeis University: SJI–89–071). 

The Crucial Nature of Attitudes and Values 

in Judicial Education (National Council of 

Juvenile and Family Court Judges: SJI–90–

058). 

Enhancing Diversity in the Court and 

Community (Institute for Court Management/ 

National Center for State Courts: SJI–91–043). 

Cultural Diversity Awareness in Nebraska 

Courts From Native American Alternatives to 

Incarceration Project (Nebraska Urban Indian 

Health Coalition: SJI–93–028). 

Race Fairness and Cultural Awareness 

Faculty Development Workshop (National 

Judicial College: SJI–93–063). 

A Videotape Training Program in Ethics 

and Professional Conduct for Nonjudicial 

Court Personnel and The Ethics Fieldbook: 

Tool For Trainers (American Judicature 

Society: SJI–93–068). 

Court Interpreter Training Course for 

Spanish Interpreters (International Institute 

of Buffalo: SJI–93–075). 

Doing Justice: Improving Equality Before 

the Law Through Literature-Based Seminars 

for Judges and Court Personnel (Brandeis 

University: SJI–94–019). 

Multi-Cultural Training for Judges and 

Court Personnel (St. Petersburg Junior 

College: SJI–95–006). 

Ethical Standards for Judicial Settlement: 

Developing a Judicial Education Module 

(American Judicature Society: SJI–95–082). 

Code of Ethics for the Court Employees of 

California (California Administrative Office 

of the Courts: SJI–95–245). 

Workplace Sexual Harassment Awareness 

and Prevention (California Administrative 

Office of the Courts: SJI–96–089). 

Just Us On Justice: A Dialogue on Diversity 

Issues Facing Virginia Courts (Virginia 

Supreme Court: SJI–96–150). 

When Bias Compounds: Insuring Equal 

Treatment for Women of Color in the Courts 

(National Judicial Education Program: SJI–

96–161). 

When Judges Speak Up: Ethics, the Public, 

and the Media (American Judicature Society: 

SJI–96–152). 

Family Violence and Gender-Related Violent 

Crime 

National Judicial Response to Domestic 

Violence: Civil and Criminal Curricula 

(Family Violence Prevention Fund: SJI–87–

061, SJI–89–070, SJI–91–055). 

Domestic Violence: A Curriculum for Rural 

Courts (Rural Justice Center: SJI–88–081). 

Judicial Training Materials on Spousal 

Support; Judicial Training Materials on Child 

Custody and Visitation (Women Judges’ Fund 

for Justice: SJI–89–062). 

Understanding Sexual Violence: The 

Judicial Response to Stranger and 

Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault 

(National Judicial Education Program: SJI–

92–003, SJI–98–133 [video curriculum]). 

Domestic Violence & Children: Resolving 

Custody and Visitation Disputes (Family 

Violence Prevention Fund: SJI–93–255). 

Adjudicating Allegations of Child Sexual 

Abuse When Custody Is In Dispute (National 

Judicial Education Program: SJI 95–019). 

Handling Cases of Elder Abuse: 

Interdisciplinary Curricula for Judges and 

Court Staff (American Bar Association: SJI–

93–274). 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72537 

Health and Science 

A Judge’s Deskbook on the Basic 

Philosophies and Methods of Science: Model 

Curriculum (University of Nevada, Reno: SJI–

97–030). 

Judicial Education for Appellate Court 

Judges 

Career Writing Program for Appellate 

Judges (American Academy of Judicial 

Education: SJI–88–086). 

Civil and Criminal Procedural Innovations 

for Appellate Courts (National Center for 

State Courts: SJI–94–002). 

Judicial Branch Education: Faculty and 

Program Development 

The Leadership Institute in Judicial 

Education and The Advanced Leadership 

Institute in Judicial Education (University of 

Memphis: SJI–91–021). 

‘‘Faculty Development Instructional 

Program’’ from Curriculum Review (National 

Judicial College: SJI–91–039). 

Resource Manual and Training for Judicial 

Education Mentors (National Association of 

State Judicial Educators: SJI–95–233). 

Institute for Faculty Excellence in Judicial 

Education (National Council of Juvenile and 

Family Court Judges: SJI–96–042; University 

of Memphis: SJI–01–202). 

Orientation, Mentoring, and Continuing 

Professional Education of Judges and Court 

Personnel 

Legal Institute for Special and Limited 

Jurisdiction Judges (National Judicial College: 

SJI–89–043, SJI–91–040). 

Pre-Bench Training for New Judges 

(American Judicature Society: SJI–90–028). 

A Unified Orientation and Mentoring 

Program for New Judges of All Arizona Trial 

Courts (Arizona Supreme Court: SJI–90–078). 

Court Organization and Structure (Institute 

for Court Management/National Center for 

State Courts: SJI–91–043). 

New Employee Orientation Facilitators 

Guide (Minnesota Supreme Court: SJI–92–

155). 

Magistrates Correspondence Course 

(Alaska Court System: SJI–92–156). 

Bench Trial Skills and Demeanor: An 

Interactive Manual (National Judicial 

College: SJI 94–058). 

Ethical Issues in the Election of Judges 

(National Judicial College: SJI–94–142). 

Caseflow Management; Resources, Budget, 

and Finance; Visioning and Strategic 

Planning; Leadership; Purposes and 

Responsibilities of Courts; Information 

Management Technology; Human Resources 

Management; Education, Training, and 

Development; Public Information and the 

Media from ‘‘NACM Core Competency 

Curriculum Guidelines’’ (National 

Association for Court Management: SJI–96–

148). 

Innovative Approaches to Improving 

Competencies of General Jurisdiction Judges 

(National Judicial College: SJI–98–001). 

Caseflow Management from ‘‘Innovative 

Educational Programs for Judges and Court 

Managers’’ (Justice Management Institute: 

SJI–98–041). 

Juveniles and Families in Court 

Fundamental Skills Training Curriculum 

for Juvenile Probation Officers (National 

Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: 

SJI–90–017). 

Child Support Across State Lines: The 

Uniform Interstate Family Support Act from 

Uniform Interstate Family Support Act: 

Development and Delivery of a Judicial 

Training Curriculum (ABA Center on 

Children and the Law: SJI–94–321). 

Juvenile Justice at the Crossroads: 

Literature-Based Seminars for Judges, Court 

Personnel, and Community Leaders 

(Brandeis University: SJI–99–150). 

Strategic and Futures Planning 

Minding the Courts into the Twentieth 

Century (Michigan Judicial Institute: SJI–89–

029). 

An Approach to Long-Range Strategic 

Planning in the Courts (Center for Public 

Policy Studies: SJI–91–045). 

Substance Abuse 

Good Times, Bad Times: Drugs, Youth, and 

the Judiciary (Professional Development and 

Training Center, Inc.: SJI–91–095). 

Gaining Momentum: A Model Curriculum 

for Drug Courts (Florida Office of the State 

Courts Administrator: SJI–94–291). 

Judicial Response to Substance Abuse: 

Children, Adolescents, and Families 

(National Council of Juvenile and Family 

Court Judges: SJI–95–030). 

Judicial Education on Substance Abuse 

(American Judges Association and National 

Center for State Courts: SJI–01–210). 

BILLING CODE 6820–SC–P 

72538 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.000</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72539 


EN05DE05.001</GPH> 
72540 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.002</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72541 


EN05DE05.003</GPH> 
72542 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.004</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72543 


EN05DE05.005</GPH> 
72544 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.006</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72545 


EN05DE05.007</GPH> 
72546 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.008</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72547 


EN05DE05.009</GPH> 
72548 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.010</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72549 


EN05DE05.011</GPH> 
72550 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.012</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72551 


EN05DE05.013</GPH> 
72552 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 


EN05DE05.014</GPH> 
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 232 / Monday, December 5, 2005 / Notices 72553 

[FR Doc. 05–23542 Filed 12–2–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–SC–C 


EN05DE05.015</GPH>