21238 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs

[OJP NO. 1079]

ZRIN 1121–ZA33

Program Plans for Fiscal Year 1996

AGENCY: Department of Justice, Office of

Justice Programs.

ACTION: Notice of program plans.

DATES: See specific Program Plan.

ADDRESSES: All questions concerning

these Program Plans should be

addressed to the appropriate Bureau or

Office at 633 Indiana Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Preface: OJP Bureaus’ Fiscal Year 1996

Program Plans

The Fiscal Year 1996 Program Plans

for the United States Department of

Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP)

Bureaus—the National Institute of

Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance,

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, and Office for

Victims of Crime—represent a

continuation of our concerted effort to

work in partnership with law

enforcement and criminal justice

agencies across the nation to break the

cycle of drugs and violence and

eliminate the consequences of crime.

This represents, as well, the second year

that OJP will have published all its

discretionary Program Plans together in

the Federal Register.

Because of scarce resources at every

level of government today, the OJP

Program Plans emphasize increasing the

collaboration across Federal, State, and

local agencies; leveraging resources with

other Federal agencies, foundations, and

the private sector; identifying specific

needs, priorities, and gaps in the

system; and implementing innovative

strategies that demonstrate concrete

results while at the same time being

cost-effective. Because many of today’s

crime problems require solutions that

extend beyond traditional criminal

justice boundaries, new systemwide

responses are encouraged and

comprehensive community efforts are

highlighted.

This is particularly important in

strengthening our response to escalating

youth violence—especially gang

activity—and juvenile victimization.

Building on the development of the

OJJDP Comprehensive Strategy for

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders and the National Juvenile

Justice Action Plan released by the

Attorney General this Spring, the FY

1996 plan supports a balanced approach

to aggressively addressing juvenile

delinquency and violence through

graduated sanctions, improving the

juvenile justice system’s ability to

respond, and preventing the onset of

delinquency. Initiatives to address

violent, serious, and chronic juvenile

offenders are highlighted. Major new

program areas focus on the development

of one-stop, community-based intake,

assessment, referral, and program

service centers; supporting the linkages

between community and law

enforcement responses to youth gun

violence and gang activity; and

improving the dependency and criminal

court systems and the community’s

response to child abuse and neglect—

factors studies show perpetuate violence

in future generations.

The OJP Program Plans also support

community-based initiatives that

recognize the lead role that

communities must play in violence

prevention and the strong coordinated,

multidisciplinary approach required to

combat crime in our neighborhoods. For

example, using a planning grant

approach which emphasizes the

importance of first developing

community mobilization strategies in

key segments of the criminal justice

system, BJA’s Comprehensive

Communities Program—which is being

continued in FY 1996—encourages a

jurisdiction-wide approach that

includes community policing, the

establishment of drug courts, expedited

prosecution and diversion, gang

prevention and intervention, dispute

and conflict resolution, and alternatives

to incarceration.

Building on the achievements of past

efforts and guided by extensive input

from its constituent groups, the OVC

programming looks to communities to

establish integrated, inclusive

environments where comprehensive

services are provided for crime victims

in a single location. The plan offers

communities the information, training,

tools, and technical assistance needed to

create supportive, multidisciplinary

facilities especially designed for

victims.

Underlying all the Program Plans is

the importance of understanding ‘‘what

works’’ and ‘‘best practices’’ so that

jurisdictions can learn from one another

and not have to constantly ‘‘reinvent the

wheel.’’ In this regard, the NIJ plan

continues its long-range emphasis on

developing knowledge and Federal

leadership that will assist jurisdictions

in advancing six important goals: reduce

violent crime, reduce drug- and alcoholrelated crime, reduce the consequences

of crime, improve crime prevention,

improve law enforcement and justice

systems, and develop new technologies.

One opportunity we have to work

together to make our communities safer

is through the training and technical

assistance available from OJP. As we

endeavor to determine ‘‘what works’’—

through research, evaluation, and

demonstration grants—communities are

encouraged to request technical

assistance and training to replicate

successful demonstration programs and

implement ‘‘best practices.’’

We will be issuing separate

solicitations for Crime Act programs in

the areas of Violence Against Women,

Drug Courts, Corrections Facilities

Construction, Residential Substance

Abuse, and the National Criminal

History Improvement Program. For

information about these programs—as

well as about the application process for

the programs described here—you can

call the DOJ Response Center at 1–800–

421–6770.

I hope that the OJP Program Plans that

follow are responsive to the most

significant needs in the criminal justice

field; they represent our best thinking

on how the Federal government can

make a solid contribution to the

problems of crime and violence facing

this country.

Laurie Robinson,

Assistant Attorney General, Office of Justice

Programs.

Bureau of Justice Assistance

FY 1996 Discretionary Grant Program

Plan

Dear Colleague:

I am pleased to present the Bureau of

Justice Assistance (BJA) Discretionary

Program Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 1996.

Through the Byrne Discretionary Grant

Program, BJA provides leadership for the

prevention and control of crime and violence

and for criminal justice system improvement

at the State and local levels. BJA also

develops and tests new approaches in

criminal justice and crime control, and

encourages replication of effective programs

and practices by States and local agencies.

Our mission is to provide leadership and

assistance in support of local criminal justice

strategies to achieve strong neighborhoods

and safe communities. Accordingly, this year

we will intensify our focus on the tasks of

helping to make communities safe, building

strong crime-resistant neighborhoods,

increasing citizen involvement in their

communities, and improving the

effectiveness of the criminal justice system.

We are guided in the achievement of our

mission by a very specific set of

programmatic goals. BJA’s programmatic

goals are:

• To promote effective innovative crime

control and prevention strategies.

• To demonstrate and promote replication

of effective crime control programs that
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21239

support public-private partnerships,

planning, and criminal justice system

improvement.

• To leverage and efficiently administer

available resources.

• To provide a dynamic work environment

that fosters and encourages excellence,

innovation, and responsiveness.

The resultant FY 1996 BJA Discretionary

Grant Program Plan addresses many of the

most pressing challenges facing the Nation’s

criminal justice system. For example, the

Program Plan addresses the issue of youth

violence through programs that support drug

education, prevention, and treatment; build

skills in conflict resolution; intervene to

reduce criminal use of guns and gang

involvement; and provide alternative

correctional sanctions for first-time

nonviolent offenders. Additionally, the

unique needs of the elderly are recognized

through programs that promote safety and

independence for the elderly, enhance

resource availability through productive

public and private partnerships, and provide

protection against health care fraud.

Byrne discretionary grant awards support

demonstration projects, national-scope

programs, training and technical assistance,

and other innovative programs that fill the

gaps in the criminal justice system to make

it stronger and more comprehensive.

Towards this end, substantial BJA

discretionary funds will be used to continue

strengthening community-based initiatives,

such as the Comprehensive Communities

Program and, within Native American

communities, the Tribal Strategies Against

Violence Program. Similarly, the BJA

Comprehensive Homicide Initiative

emphasizes the importance of multiagency

coordination—at all levels of government—in

addressing prevention, intervention,

enforcement, and prosecution.

In summary, the BJA FY 1996

Discretionary Program Plan will target funds,

training, and technical assistance in support

of effective and innovative programs that

show the greatest potential for addressing the

Nation’s criminal justice challenges. I

welcome your comments and your

partnership.

Nancy E. Gist,

Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Introduction

The Bureau of Justice Assistance

(BJA) of the U.S. Department of Justice

supports States and local communities

in addressing problems of crime and

violence. During Fiscal Year (FY) 1996,

BJA is placing emphasis on

implementing comprehensive

approaches to crime, neighborhoodbased programs with active citizen

involvement, violence prevention and

control initiatives, and programs that

not only improve the functioning of the

criminal justice system, but also focus

on enhancing the system’s ability to

remove serious and violent offenders

from our communities.

This FY 1996 Discretionary Grant

Program Plan provides summaries of

these programs, which are funded under

the Edward Byrne Memorial State and

Local Law Enforcement Assistance

(Byrne) Discretionary Grant Program. In

addition, it describes planned activities

for the Regional Information Sharing

Systems Program and the National

White-Collar Crime Center, which also

are administered by BJA, and joint

efforts with other Federal agencies.

Program Goals

The FY 1996 Discretionary Grant

Program Plan addresses BJA’s two goals

in assisting State and local units of

government: (1) Reduce and prevent

crime and violence; and (2) Improve the

functioning of the criminal justice

system. To facilitate achievement of

these goals, enhanced coordination and

cooperation of Federal, State, and local

efforts will be emphasized. Objectives

for each of the goals are outlined below,

followed by BJA’s programmatic

priorities and framework and program

summaries that describe how the goals

will be achieved.

Goal 1—Reduce and Prevent Crime and

Violence

Objectives:

• Encourage the development and

implementation of comprehensive

strategies to reduce and prevent crime

and violence.

• Encourage the active participation

of community organizations and

citizens in efforts to prevent crime, drug

use, and violence.

• Provide national-scope training and

technical assistance in support of efforts

to prevent crime, drug use, and

violence.

• Provide young people with

legitimate opportunities and activities

that serve as alternatives to crime and

involvement with gangs.

• Reduce the availability of illegal

weapons; and develop programs to

address violence in our communities,

homes, schools, and workplaces.

Goal 2—Improve the Functioning of the

Criminal Justice System

Objectives:

• Enhance the capacity of law

enforcement agencies to reduce crime—

especially drug trafficking, drug sales,

and violence.

• Improve the effectiveness and

efficiency of all aspects of the

adjudication process.

• Assist States in freeing prison space

for serious and violent offenders

through the design, development, and

implementation of effective correctional

options for nonviolent offenders.

• Enhance the ability of State and

local agencies, in conjunction with the

Immigration and Naturalization Service

(INS), to apprehend and deport criminal

aliens.

• Evaluate the effectiveness of funded

programs, disseminate program results,

and enhance the ability of criminal

justice agencies to use new information

technologies.

How Program Priorities Are Established

Priorities for the FY 1996

Discretionary Grant Program reflect a

balance of congressional mandates,

Administration priorities, and needs

expressed by State and local criminal

justice practitioners. The two

overarching goals listed above are

derived directly from the authorizing

legislation for the Byrne Discretionary

Grant Program. Priorities for a number

of specific programs to address those

goals are mandated by Congress through

the earmarking of the Byrne

Discretionary Grant Program

appropriation.

During the recent Byrne Program

planning process, BJA solicited input on

priorities from national organizations

representing State and local

governments, criminal justice agencies,

and community groups. Input was also

requested from the State agencies that

administer the Byrne Formula Grant

Program. This year, BJA has instituted a

continuing practice of convening a

number of focused program-planning

workshops, or focus groups. These focus

groups, structured around a specific

criminal justice issue, are comprised of

interdisciplinary policymakers and

practitioners from all levels of

government. They serve as a forum to

discuss needs, identify emerging issues,

and propose innovative programmatic

solutions.

Types of Programs To Be Funded

BJA is authorized by Congress to

award grants to public and private

agencies and organizations for nationalscope, demonstration, training, and

technical assistance programs in

support of States and local jurisdictions.

National-scope programs provide a

service or product of benefit throughout

the country or across multiple States, or

address issues of national concern.

Demonstration programs develop, test,

evaluate, and document new programs

and practices. Training for State and

local criminal justice practitioners and

other professionals provides state-ofthe-art information on effective

programs and practices. Technical

assistance is provided to sites

participating in demonstration programs

or, depending on available resources, is

provided to help an individual
21240 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

jurisdiction implement a program or

practice or address a specific issue.

How Discretionary Grants Will Be

Made

This year, the majority of the

discretionary grant funding is being

awarded on a noncompetitive basis. The

following factors limit the number of

competitive programs:

Congressional Earmarks—Each year

Congress directs BJA to award a portion

of the appropriated Byrne Program

funds to specified programs and/or

organizations. In FY 1996, the

Conference Report of the

Appropriations Committee directed the

funding for $45.6 million of the $60

million likely to be appropriated for

general discretionary programs, such as

the Weed and Seed Program, the

National Citizens’ Crime Prevention

Campaign, the Drug Abuse Resistance

Education (D.A.R.E.) Program, and the

Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area

Drug Enforcement Task Force.

Continuation and Implementation

Grants—Many of BJA’s programs require

several years of implementation to

accomplish their goals. Demonstration

sites, which are generally identified

through a competitive selection process,

may require 2 to 3 years of funding to

fully develop, implement, and evaluate

a program. In addition, BJA has funded

several initial planning efforts, with

implementation funding provided in

subsequent years.

Limited Competition—When specific

program criteria or objectives are

applicable only to a narrowly defined

group of potential applicants, a limited

competition may be held. Program

criteria and objectives typically are

defined by specific jurisdictional

demographic variables or by a specific

crime problem.

Sole Source Selection—In some cases,

only one organization or agency has the

capability, expertise, or constituents to

adequately administer a program that

BJA deems essential to implement. For

example, an association representing a

constituency that BJA wants to reach

through technical assistance or training

also may be the best organization to

implement that program. In other cases,

BJA may make an award on a

noncompetitive basis to an agency that

has developed an innovative program

and has the expertise to implement it.

Framework for Programming

Guiding Principles

Three principles underpin the design

of BJA’s FY 1996 Discretionary Grant

Program Plan—comprehensiveness,

addressing unmet needs, and leveraging

resources. These principles are

embodied in each of the four

programmatic themes, and reflect our

intent to make the most effective and

efficient use of limited Federal criminal

justice program resources.

Comprehensiveness

Crime prevention and control

initiatives are most effective when they

relate directly to a comprehensive

strategy. Such a strategy provides the

context or anchor for addressing locally

determined priorities; describes in

detail how programs implemented by

government agencies, other service

providers, and residents mutually

support one another in focusing on

these priorities; and serves as the means

for developing future partnerships

among a wide variety of public and

private resources. For these reasons, we

have looked at ways of developing and,

in some cases, reconfiguring programs

to ensure that they are comprehensive

in nature and promote partnerships that

support local strategic planning and

implementation.

Explicit in any successful State or

local crime prevention and control

strategy is the engagement of the

ultimate beneficiaries—the community

residents. Therefore, community-based

strategies, and resulting initiatives, must

focus on neighborhood problems by

involving community leaders and

residents in the planning and delivery

of services. Among the programs we are

supporting, the Comprehensive

Communities Program, the National

Citizens’ Crime Prevention Campaign,

and the Tribal Strategies Against

Violence Program all support

partnerships with Federal, State, and

local governments, private

organizations, and foundations that

develop and achieve solutions

addressing a multitude of problems

concerning crime and quality of life.

Some comprehensive program

approaches are problem specific. For

example, the Comprehensive Gang

Initiative demonstrates a model

approach to gang issues that carefully

balances consideration of prevention,

intervention, and suppression strategies.

The model is designed to bring together

cooperative and coordinated efforts by

the police, other criminal justice

agencies, human services providers,

community agencies, and residents.

Other programs, such as the

Community-Based Prosecution

Initiative, are not problem specific, but

bring together the community, the

prosecutor’s office, and the local courts

in problem solving, speedier access to

justice, and facilitation of offender

reintegration back into neighborhoods.

Addressing Unmet Needs

In carrying out its mission, BJA

recognizes that the dollars available for

Byrne Program discretionary funding

represent a very small fraction of the

overall resources available for criminal

justice programming (less than one

percent). To ensure that taxpayers

receive the greatest return possible on

the investment of these limited funds,

we have focused on programs that

complement previous or ongoing efforts,

and we have made every attempt to

avoid duplicating the efforts of other

Federal agencies.

BJA provides balance in its approach,

and emphasizes the involvement of key

stakeholders in the development of new

initiatives. In FY 1996, an important

priority will be to address unmet needs

by demonstrating or supporting

programs designed to correct current

deficiencies in the delivery of criminal

justice services—deficiencies that

threaten to compromise the

effectiveness of the criminal justice

system. Examples of these initiatives

include:

The Community Prosecution and

Community Probation Program, which

will explore a range of innovations to

improve access to criminal justice

services at the community level.

The Training in Anti-Drug Activities

and Cultural Differences Involving

Illegal Aliens Initiative and the Criminal

Alien Identification and Intervention

Program, which provide training and

technical support to State and local

criminal justice agencies dealing with

issues of criminal and illegal aliens.

The Comprehensive Homicide

Initiative, which focuses on a holistic

approach to homicide that integrates

prevention, intervention, and

enforcement measures through public

agencies, private organizations, and the

community.

The DNA Resource Unit, which will

provide technical assistance to

prosecutors in the understanding and

use of DNA typing technology in the

prosecution of cases.

The Assessment and Enhancement of

Indigent Defense Initiative, which will

explore methods for improving the

overall effectiveness of the adjudication

process.

The Correctional Options Program,

which has provided a broad range of

programming for provision of treatment

services and alternatives to

incarceration for nonviolent offenders.

BJA’s emphasis in FY 1996 will be to

support a national dissemination and

technical assistance initiative that will

inform key decisionmakers at the State

and local levels of the lessons that BJA
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21241

has learned about the planning,

development, implementation, and

evaluation of successful Correctional

Options projects.

Leveraging Resources

BJA has a responsibility to ensure that

programs are cost effective; that, where

appropriate, costs are shared among

entities receiving benefits from BJAsupported programs; and that there is a

strong likelihood effective programs will

be maintained beyond the point where

Federal funds are no longer provided.

Thus, BJA strongly encourages

prospective applicants to consider all

potential resources when developing

program proposals and applying for

Byrne Program grant funds.

Although Discretionary Grant

Program funds may be used to pay up

to 100 percent of total project costs

under an initial grant award, BJA has

instituted a policy of giving favorable

consideration to proposals in which an

applicant agency or jurisdiction has also

committed its own resources in

furtherance of program objectives. The

applicant’s resources could consist of

funding derived from local

appropriations or from other sources,

public or private. Contributed resources

may also be ‘‘in kind,’’ including

dedicated personnel, facilities, supplies,

or equipment. Volunteer efforts are also

taken into consideration.

Successful leveraging of resources is

illustrated in the following two

examples. In BJA’s Organized Crime

Narcotics task force program, the

participating agencies support all

regular personnel costs and most

infrastructure costs, and Byrne

Discretionary Grant funds support

limited overtime costs, investigative

support costs, and some confidential

expenditures. Alternatively, BJA has

provided a grant to the Foundation for

Advancements in Science and

Education (FASE) to produce a film

addressing the issue of date and spousal

violence. BJA agreed to provide funding

support on the condition that FASE

match the grant amount with funds from

other sources. Faced with this

challenge, FASE was able to more than

match the grant with funds from public

and private sources.

To further facilitate a strong

partnership with its grantees, and to

increase the number of new initiatives,

BJA has instituted a policy of providing

a declining share of total costs for many

projects where continuation funding is

considered. In addition to making BJA

funding resources more widely available

for additional program opportunities,

this policy requires a demonstration of

commitment from applicants, enhancing

the likelihood of program

institutionalization. Thus, in FY 1996

and beyond, second-year awards will be

made for a maximum of 75 percent of

total project costs, and third-year

awards will be made for up to 50

percent of total project costs.

Programmatic Themes

Program themes frame our guiding

principles and provide the operational

context through which BJA implements

its national-scope, demonstration,

training, and technical assistance

programs. The themes result from

priorities articulated by the Attorney

General; our program experiences and

lessons learned from demonstration and

evaluation of crime prevention and

control efforts; and the information

provided by States in their Byrne

Formula Grant Program strategies.

Public—Private Partnerships in Support

of Local Strategies

Developing and sustaining

partnerships is essential, especially

when addressing crime issues through

comprehensive strategies. Competing

demands on resources, development of

new skills and approaches to problem

solving, emergence of private

foundations focusing on public safety

issues, and the direct participation of

the community itself are influencing the

way in which government operates.

Partnerships among public agencies

and between those agencies and private

organizations are becoming a vital

theme in delivering comprehensive

services that address the quality of life

in our communities. Effective

partnerships begin with all participants

engaged in strategy development, and

carry through to the end goal of service

delivery and evaluation.

BJA continues to stress the

importance of public-private

partnerships at the Federal, State, and

local levels in its program development

efforts. State and local officials are

encouraged to collaborate to ensure that

local, comprehensive crime prevention

and control strategies are integrated into

State planning efforts. This relationship

helps to ensure that Byrne Formula

Grant funds, other Federal resources,

and State-appropriated monies are

channeled in a coordinated manner in

support of local comprehensive

initiatives. Evidence of these

partnerships, through memoranda of

understanding, commitment of

resources, and shared responsibility for

developing and implementing strategies

to make our communities safe, will be

a determining factor in BJA’s

commitment of resources.

Many of the programs to be

implemented in FY 1996 will build

upon partnerships developed in

previous years. As some of these efforts

reach the final stages of demonstration,

and as Federal financial support is

phased out, the strength of local

partnership arrangements will be even

more critical to ensure

institutionalization. For example, BJA

soon will be completing the ChildrenAt-Risk Program, which is supported by

BJA and a national public-private

partnership consisting of the Center for

Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA)

and six private foundations that focus

on youth intervention. This effort,

equally supported by the U.S.

Department of Justice and the private

sector, reflects the commitment of over

$7.5 million since FY 1992.

Other programs, such as the

Comprehensive Communities Program

(CCP) and Pulling America’s

Communities Together (PACT) have

experienced enormous success in

building partnerships. In Denver, the

Alliance for the Prevention of Violence,

a collaborative of charitable

organizations that serves Colorado, has

integrated the PACT/CCP effort into its

philanthropic considerations. The East

Bay Corridor CCP initiative, a program

that unites 18 cities in two counties in

anticrime initiatives, joins the public

agencies from those jurisdictions with

the East Bay Community Foundation, a

local funding collaborative, to focus on

youth crime in the Corridor.

Enhancement of Public Confidence in

the Criminal Justice System

In recent years there has been a

perception of growing erosion of public

confidence in the criminal justice

system and the services it provides.

Many factors have contributed to this

concern—including public outrage

resulting from isolated criminal

incidents, such as crimes that have been

committed by ex-offenders on parole;

use of excessive force by law

enforcement; urban disorders; and an

emphasis in newspaper and television

news reports on sensationalizing

incidents of violent crime.

BJA supports programs that promote

balance and fairness in law enforcement

and the criminal justice system. By

supporting programs that feature

community participation as a

cornerstone, BJA seeks to educate and

actively engage citizens, thereby

improving public confidence in the

criminal justice system.

Through its law enforcement

programs, BJA provides a solid

foundation for enabling jurisdictions to

ensure public safety and further
21242 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

promote public confidence. Such

programs expand coordination with

antiviolence task forces, provide

assistance to State and local criminal

justice agencies, and support

communities in the control and

prevention of street crime.

A National Sentencing Symposium

will be co-sponsored by BJA, the

National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and

the State Justice Institute (SJI). This

collaborative initiative will address the

public’s lack of confidence in the

system, examine the strengths and

shortcomings of current sentencing

policies and address the importance of

accountability and the need to alleviate

sentencing disparities.

Through the Community Prosecution

Program, BJA will demonstrate

community engagement with

prosecutors’ offices and the local courts

in problem solving, providing speedier

access to justice, and facilitating the

reintegration of offenders back into

neighborhoods. This program will

promote a positive image of the criminal

justice system, allay public fear, and

improve neighborhood and community

involvement with criminal justice

professionals.

Alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders is another important

programmatic area. Often, nonviolent

offenders who could be punished more

effectively through a less expensive

alternative are sentenced to

incarceration. A recent analysis of the

annual needs assessments that are

conducted through the Byrne Formula

Grant Program indicated that the two

areas of greatest need at the State and

local levels are alternatives to

incarceration and offender treatment

services.

In FY 1996, BJA will support a

national dissemination and technical

assistance initiative to inform key

decisionmakers at the State and local

levels about the lessons learned in the

planning, development,

implementation, and evaluation of

successful, cost-effective, Correctional

Options projects for nonviolent

offenders. These programs maintain

public safety and, at the same time, hold

offenders accountable.

Criminal Justice System Response to

Violence—Particularly Youth Violence

Although 1994 Uniform Crime

Reporting (UCR) data show that violent

crime dropped 4 percent and property

crime dropped 3 percent, citizens across

the country believe otherwise. Whereas

violent crime rates for older adults have

remained steady or declined, the public

believes that violence is on the increase.

This belief is reflected in the 1993 U.S.

Department of Justice (DOJ) National

Crime Victimization Survey, which

marked a significant increase of 25

percent in the violent victimizations of

black males aged 12 to 24. The Bureau

of Justice Statistics (BJS) reported in its

Selected Findings: Violent Crime that

young people aged 16 to 24 consistently

have the highest violent crime rates.

When gang affiliation is considered,

these youth-based crime statistics

increase at crisis proportions.

Other national-scope surveys indicate

the following:

• Elected officials in almost 400 cities

believe that youth crime and violence

has escalated.

• Throughout the year, 4 million

women are physically abused by their

husbands or boyfriends.

• The annual number of child abuse

cases is growing.

• Drug use, especially marijuana, is

on the increase among students.

• A child dies from gunfire every 98

minutes.

To deter this violence, BJA is working

with representatives of Federal, State,

tribal, and local governments and

community leaders to enhance their

current criminal justice planning

processes to better implement

comprehensive, systemwide strategic

interventions at the neighborhood level.

When properly applied, this holistic

approach, which is supported with FY

1996 crime prevention funding, is cost

effective, provides focus for the delivery

of services (e.g., law enforcement,

social, and education services), involves

citizens as partners, and assists youth in

making responsible decisions to develop

healthier and safer lifestyles.

Evaluation and Assessment Efforts

Critical to gauging the success of the

investment of taxpayer dollars is the

support of evaluation efforts that

measure what works and what doesn’t

work in crime control and prevention

and in criminal justice system

improvement. This information can be

disseminated to the State and local

levels, where decisions about

replication of program successes are

made.

Because we believe that it also is

critical to reinforce with the States the

role that evaluation must play in any

grant program, and to help States build

the capacity to measure the impact of

programs that they fund, we are

continuing our State and local capacitybuilding initiative with the assistance of

NIJ. If the States are to serve as

laboratories for evaluation and

assessment, they must institutionalize

performance measurement, monitoring,

and reporting mechanisms. BJA’s

evaluation capacity-building initiative

supports these efforts.

In partnership with NIJ, we are

designing a challenge program whereby

States will be invited to partner with a

local research/evaluation institution

such as a university, select a promising

program for rigorous evaluation that

otherwise might not be evaluated, and

propose a research design.

The principles and programmatic

themes are cross-cutting, and together

form the framework for the BJA

program. This framework has evolved

from our programmatic experience and

will help chart our direction for future

programming efforts. While the

individual program summaries are

presented by ‘‘discipline,’’ each program

also represents one or more principle

and theme.

Program Summaries

Comprehensive Programs

Comprehensive Communities Program

Grantee: 16 sites nationwide

The Comprehensive Communities

Program (CCP) is demonstrating an

innovative, comprehensive, and

integrated multiagency approach to

comprehensive violent crime control

and community mobilization in 16

jurisdictions across the country.

There is perhaps no more urgent

domestic problem facing our country

than violence. The only way to make

progress against this epidemic is to

marshal the coordinated efforts of

communities; the private sector; and

Federal, State, and local governments.

CCP seeks to catalyze the development

of such partnerships.

Two key principles underlie this

initiative. First, communities must play

the lead role in fostering violence

prevention partnerships. Second, State

and local jurisdictions must establish

strong coordinated and

multidisciplinary approaches. Under

the Comprehensive Communities

Program, communities faced with high

rates of drug abuse and violent crime

develop a comprehensive strategy for

crime and drug control that requires

police and other city agencies to work

in partnership with the community to

address crime- and violence-related

problems and the environment that

fosters them.

CCP goals are:

• To suppress violence and restore

the sense of community wellness

necessary to effectively recapture the

security of our neighborhoods.

• To focus on community problems

and concerns by initiating

comprehensive planning and improved
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21243

intergovernmental and community

relationships.

CCP objectives are:

• To develop a comprehensive,

multiagency strategy within each

community to identify the causes and

origins of violence and to control and

prevent violent crime and drug-related

crime.

• To include in each strategy a

jurisdictionwide commitment to

community policing and other efforts

that encourage citizens to take an active

role in problem solving.

• To coordinate existing Federal,

State, local, and private agency

resources and concentrate these

resources to maximize their impact on

reducing violent crime and drug-related

crime in the program communities.

The Comprehensive Communities

Program has been administered in two

phases. During Phase I, between April

and September 1994, planning grants

enabled the 16 jurisdictions to develop

their crime control and community

mobilization strategies. Phase II, from

October 1, 1994, to September 30, 1996,

provided initial funds to the 16

jurisdictions to begin implementing

these strategies. The strategies require

criminal justice agencies, other

governmental organizations, and the

private sector to work in partnership

with the community. Each strategy

includes a jurisdictionwide

commitment to community policing,

coordination among public and private

agencies (e.g., social services and public

health agencies), and efforts that

encourage citizens to take an active role

in problem solving. In addition to the

community policing and community

mobilization components, most of the

strategies include application of drug

courts, expedited prosecution and

diversion, gang prevention and

intervention, dispute and conflict

resolution, and alternatives to

incarceration.

Each of the sites is encouraged to

coordinate with and complement other

comprehensive Federal, State, and local

efforts. For example, the CCP strategies

for Atlanta, Denver, Omaha, and

Washington, D.C., are tailored

specifically to support the Pulling

America’s Communities Together

(PACT) Initiative in those jurisdictions.

Also, many of the sites are participating

in the Empowerment Zone/Enterprise

Community Initiative; the CCP strategy

can represent a viable crime-control

component for that initiative. In

addition, several of the sites have

included in their local strategies

enhancements to or expansion of Weed

and Seed efforts in selected target

neighborhoods.

Due to the broad nature of CCP and

the decision to draw from multiple and

independent initiatives, technical

assistance and training in support of

CCP is being provided through several

sources, as follows:

Criminal Justice Associates (CJA)

coordinates overall technical assistance

and training delivery under the program

and prepares program documents (i.e.,

the implementation manual, fact sheets,

and program status reports). At the

project level, CJA focuses on site needs

relating to project management and

alternatives to incarceration.

The National Crime Prevention

Council (NCPC) provides program-level

assistance in preparing documents (i.e.,

coordination in developing the

implementation manual and

distributing newsletters). NCPC focuses

on site needs relating to community

mobilization and engagement, dispute

and conflict resolution, and resource

development.

The Police Executive Research Forum

(PERF) focuses on comprehensive gang

initiatives in 11 of the 16 CCP sites.

The American Prosecutors Research

Institute (APRI) focuses on site needs as

they relate to community prosecution

and prosecution and diversion.

In FY 1996, funds will be made

available to a number of the

demonstration sites to continue

operations into FY 1997. Technical

assistance will be provided through

existing and continuation grants among

the cadre of current providers.

Crime Prevention

National Citizens’ Crime Prevention

Campaign

Grantee: National Crime Prevention

Council; Washington, DC

The National Citizens’ Crime

Prevention Campaign focuses on

helping individuals, community and

civic organizations, and Federal, State,

and local government agencies build

better, safer, and more caring

communities. FY 1996 activities will

enable the Campaign to continue its

work on crime and violence prevention

and drug demand reduction. Work

elements will address the production

and dissemination of air and print ads

using McGruff the Crime Dog and

nephew Scruff public service

announcements (in English and

Spanish) that target both youth and their

caretakers; the development and

reproduction of an array of crime and

drug abuse prevention support

materials; and the provision of national,

State, and local technical assistance and

training workshops in topical areas

ranging from planning and managing

crime prevention to comprehensive

planning development.

Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Grantee: Boys & Girls Clubs of America;

Atlanta, GA

BJA will continue to provide Federal

resources to the Boys & Girls Clubs of

America for the establishment and

enhancement of Boys & Girls Clubs in

public housing and other community

settings where there is a concentration

of poverty, crime, and violence. FY 1996

activities will emphasize the partnering

of BJA and Boys & Girls Clubs of

America staff to identify local recipient

sites in up to 30 communities across the

country; the continued support of

jurisdictions participating in the BJAsponsored Comprehensive Communities

Program; the incorporation of conflict

resolution, mentoring, and parental

outreach and training into the local

programming of clubs receiving Federal

enhancement awards; and the

establishment of a national Native

American advisory board that will meet

regularly to assess and provide program

recommendations for clubs established

on Indian reservations.

Drug Abuse Resistance Education

Grantee: D.A.R.E. America; Inglewood,

CA

In FY 1996, BJA will continue its

work with D.A.R.E. America to support

the provision of Drug Abuse Resistance

Education (D.A.R.E.) technical

assistance and training to local and

State law enforcement officers and the

accreditation of State D.A.R.E. Training

Centers. These initiatives will be

accomplished through provision of

resources for the five D.A.R.E. Regional

Training Centers (RTCs) administered

by the Arizona Department of Public

Safety, the City of Los Angeles Police

Department, the Illinois State Police, the

North Carolina Bureau of Investigation,

and the Virginia State Police.

Specifically, D.A.R.E. America and the

RTCs will provide D.A.R.E. Officer

Training for new D.A.R.E. officers;

D.A.R.E. In-service Training for

experienced D.A.R.E. officers; Mentor

Officer Training; D.A.R.E. Parent

Program Training for instructors who

use the D.A.R.E. curriculum to work

with and train parents; D.A.R.E. junior

and senior high school student training;

program development; assessments of

State D.A.R.E. Training Centers;

accreditation of law enforcement

agencies as D.A.R.E. Training Centers;

and technical assistance for local

agencies replicating the D.A.R.E.

Program.
21244 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

National Night Out

Grantee: National Association of Town

Watch; Wynnewood, PA

This year-long program involves the

continuing participation of more than

28 million people, including law

enforcement personnel; individuals

from other units of government,

business, education, and community

organizations; citizens; and youth in

over 8,800 communities in all 50 States,

U.S. territories, and U.S. military bases

around the world. Administered by the

National Association of Town Watch,

Inc. (NATW), FY 1996 support will

enable NATW to continue providing

information, educational materials, and

technical assistance for the development

of cost-effective police—community

partnership efforts that work toward

reducing crime, violence, and substance

abuse at the national, State, local, and

neighborhood levels.

Tribal Strategies Against Violence

Program

Grantees: Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes;

Poplar, MT and Rosebud Sioux Tribe;

Rosebud, SD

Tribal Strategies Against Violence is a

Federal—tribal partnership initiative

designed to empower Native American

communities through the development

and implementation of reservationwide

strategies to reduce crime, violence, and

drug abuse. Primary program focus is on

the formation of a centralized planning

team comprised of service providers,

whose goal it is to develop short-term

and long-term strategies that encompass

community policing and prosecution,

domestic abuse, juvenile delinquency,

and prevention education. FY 1996

program activities will extend the

program beyond the initial project sites

on the Fort Peck, Montana, and

Rosebud, South Dakota, Reservations.

BJA, through a limited competitive

process, will work with the Office of

Justice Programs (OJP) American Indian

and Alaskan Native Desk and the

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), U.S.

Department of Interior, to identify up to

four regional sites across the country.

Reservations selected for program

participation will be representative of

the Northwest, South-Southwest,

Midwest-Great Lakes, and East regions.

Law Enforcement

Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Area

Drug Enforcement Task Force

Grantee: Arlington County Police

Department; Arlington, VA

The Washington, D.C., Metropolitan

Area Drug Enforcement Task Force will

continue to (1) provide a visible law

enforcement presence; (2) disrupt major

links between drug suppliers,

distributors, and users; (3) initiate

enforcement action against property

owners who knowingly allow their

property to be used in the distribution

of illicit drugs; (4) develop

comprehensive intelligence systems;

and (5) coordinate with appropriate

agencies regarding illegal firearms used

by drug organizations.

Gang Organized Crime Narcotics

Violence Enforcement Program

Grantees: Bernalillo County Prosecutor’s

Office; Bernalillo County, NM and

Multnomah County Prosecutor’s

Office; Multnomah County, OR

This program will continue to assist

local law enforcement and prosecution

agencies in addressing the growing

problem of gang-related violence, with a

special focus on drugs and firearms.

Two sites will be funded to continue

gathering intelligence and to develop

investigative and prosecutorial

strategies designed to weaken the

structure and activities of violent gangs.

Prison Gang Intelligence Program

Grantee: Midstates Organized Crime

Information Center; Springfield, MO

The Prison Gang Intelligence Program

will be continued in FY 1996 to

implement a nationwide capability of

collecting, analyzing, and sharing

information on prison gangs, gang

members, and prison gang activities.

The program also will provide liaison

and coordination activities to

corrections agencies and law

enforcement agencies in data collection

and dissemination efforts.

The purpose of the Prison Gang

Intelligence Program is to provide for

the establishment of a system to gather,

store, and disseminate intelligence

information on prison gang members

and prison gang activities on a

nationwide basis. This system will

provide valuable support and assistance

in the investigation and prosecution of

gang-related criminal activity. It will

create a central repository of prison gang

information, formalize data collection

methods, and standardize gang

validation criteria. It will create a

mechanism whereby State and local

corrections and law enforcement

agencies can share information and be

provided analytical products that

document prison gang developments

and trends. A prison gang technical

assistance capability will also be

established.

The program goal is to facilitate,

through BJA’s Regional Information

Sharing System (RISS) projects, the

collection, exchange, and analysis of

information related to prison gangs,

gang members, and prison gang

activities; and to provide liaison and

training activities to law enforcement,

prosecution, and corrections agencies

nationwide.

Center for Task Force Training

Grantee: Institute for Intergovernmental

Research; Tallahassee, FL

The Center for Task Force Training

project will continue to help State and

local agencies address criminal justice

management issues and to provide

dedicated training and technical

assistance in support of the two Gang

Organized Crime Narcotics Violence

Enforcement Program sites, State and

locally funded multiagency task forces,

and other task forces supported by

Byrne Formula Grant Program funds.

The project will be expanded in FY

1996 to include a specialized training

program that addresses multiagency

antiterrorism preparedness. The

Domestic Terrorism Training Program,

which currently is under development

with the Federal Bureau of Investigation

(FBI), will develop, test, and evaluate

the law enforcement antiterrorism

training curriculum; identify and

document the technical assistance needs

of law enforcement agencies in the area

of antiterrorism planning and

prevention, and plan the methods of

delivery; and focus on the multiagency/

multijurisdictional aspects of the law

enforcement response to acts of

domestic terrorism.

Firearms Trafficking Program

Grantee: Multiple sites nationwide

The Firearms Trafficking Program will

continue to help State and local

governments reduce incidents of

violence by reducing the availability of

and illegal trafficking in firearms. This

program contains several component

programs that BJA has found to be

effective or promising:

The Firearms Licensee Compliance

Program. This component enhances the

ability of State and local law

enforcement agencies to conduct more

complete and comprehensive

background investigations on applicants

for new or renewed Federal Firearms

Licenses.

The Firearms Investigative Task Force

Program. This component is designed to

identify, target, investigate, and

prosecute individuals and dismantle

organizations involved in the unlawful

use, sale, or acquisition of firearms in

violation of Federal and/or State

firearms laws.

The Innovative Firearms Program.

This component assists State and local
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21245

jurisdictions in developing and

implementing innovative or enhanced

projects designed to control illicit

firearms trafficking.

Technical Assistance and Training to

Rural Areas

Grantee: Rural Justice Center, University

of Arkansas; Little Rock, AR

In FY 1996, BJA will continue to

provide technical assistance and

training to rural areas through the Rural

Justice Center of the Criminal Justice

Institute of the University of Arkansas,

Little Rock. This program assists rural

areas in the development of approaches

and strategies that address the rising

rates of crime, drug abuse, and violence,

through the provision of technical

assistance and training related to such

issues as prevention, intervention, law

enforcement, prosecution, courts,

corrections, and treatment.

Training in Anti-Drug Activities and

Cultural Differences Involving Illegal

Aliens

Grantee: International Association of

Chiefs of Police; Alexandria, VA

This program will be continued.

Through a collaborative effort between

the International Association of Chiefs

of Police (IACP) and the Immigration

and Naturalization Service (INS), the

project will continue to present to local

law enforcement officers a series of

training seminars that will enable them

to more effectively investigate crimes

involving illegal aliens.

Criminal Alien Identification and

Intervention Program

Grantees: Institute for Intergovernmental

Research; Tallahassee, FL and

National Criminal Justice Association;

Washington, DC

In FY 1996, BJA will continue to fund

technical assistance and support

services to five demonstration sites

funded in prior years. The Criminal

Alien Identification and Intervention

Program is designed to enable the

earliest possible identification, through

the Immigration and Naturalization

Service (INS) Law Enforcement Support

Center (LESC), of aliens arrested for

felony offenses. Five States that have

documented the largest alien

populations in their correctional

systems are continuing demonstration

efforts in FY 1996 with projects funded

in prior years.

The Criminal Alien Identification and

Intervention Program also is designed to

encourage States to modify statutes and

policies and implement innovative

techniques that intervene in the

criminal justice process to expeditiously

and fairly adjudicate illegal aliens

arrested or convicted of felonies; and

facilitate appropriate detainment and

deportation of these aliens.

Supporting the demonstration sites

and the program are two technical

assistance efforts. The Institute for

Intergovernmental Research provides

onsite assistance to the States in

preparing operational assessments,

identifying promising approaches, and

facilitating the testing of LESC. The

National Criminal Justice Association

(NCJA) provides research and technical

assistance for the States, for

enhancement of statutes and policies

within the States.

In FY 1994 and FY 1995, participating

States implemented Phases I through III

of the program by establishing statewide

criminal alien working groups

represented by key State and local

officials; conducting an intensive

assessment of the current processes by

which the State identifies and handles

illegal aliens entering the criminal

justice system; and documenting

promising approaches to enhance the

identification and intervention of these

illegal aliens. Work will continue in the

demonstration States, using prior year

grant awards to implement and

demonstrate promising approaches.

Comprehensive Homicide Initiative

Grantee: City of Richmond; Richmond,

VA and City of Richmond; Richmond,

CA

The Comprehensive Homicide

Initiative is designed to effectively

combat homicide and increase homicide

clearance rates through the development

and demonstration of a multifaceted

approach that can be fully documented

and ultimately replicated in other

jurisdictions. This initiative addresses

the underlying causes of homicide,

including gang violence, domestic

violence, violence associated with drug

activity, and gun availability.

The goals of the program are to reduce

homicide rates and improve homicide

clearance rates, including ‘‘cold case’’

homicides; develop innovative strategies

and processes that have a high

probability for improving the

prevention, intervention, enforcement,

and prosecution of homicide cases that

are replicable in other jurisdictions; and

document local efforts to enhance

replicability of successful components

of the program to other jurisdictions.

The Cities of Richmond, Virginia, and

Richmond, California, each have

received funding to implement the

recommendations of the International

Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)

Murder Summit Report. These cities

were selected due to their high or

increasing homicide rates, geographical

diversity, and participation in other

comprehensive criminal justice

initiatives that will provide a good base

from which to move forward.

This comprehensive program requires

coordination at the Federal, State, and

local levels. Each city’s plan must

demonstrate coordination and

cooperation among public agencies;

private organizations; and municipal,

county, State, and Federal agencies. The

plan must demonstrate that this

initiative will be integrated with other

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)-funded

programs in the local jurisdiction, such

as the Comprehensive Communities

Program; Weed and Seed; the Federal

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Safe

Streets Program; and programs funded

by the Office of Community Oriented

Policing Services, the Drug Enforcement

Administration, and the Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention. In addition, the program

must involve coordination with the

relevant U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Coordination with Housing and Urban

Development and the Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should

also be included if relevant to the

jurisdiction’s program efforts. BJA has

been working with each of the

jurisdictions since November 1995. In

each city, BJA held an onsite meeting

that served as an initial opportunity to

convene the representatives of the State

and local agencies and representatives

from Federal agencies with ongoing

programs.

Clandestine Laboratory Strategy

Training Program

Grantee: Circle Solutions, Inc.; Vienna,

VA

In FY 1996, BJA will continue support

to the Clandestine Laboratory Strategy

Training Program. The program is based

on the collective experiences and best

practices of the BJA Model Clandestine

Laboratory Enforcement Program

demonstration sites and the BJA/Drug

Enforcement Administration (DEA)

Clandestine Laboratory Clean-Up

Program. The program represents a

significant investment and effort on the

part of BJA to develop an effective

method for combating clandestine drug

laboratories in the United States. The

training delivery system and followup

technical support activities provided

will ensure that the training reaches the

audience for which it is intended in an

efficient and cost effective manner.

The Clandestine Laboratory Strategy

Training Program assists State and local

policymakers and practitioners

responsible for law enforcement

resource allocation decisions in
21246 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

developing policies, procedures, and

programs related to the hazardous

chemical problems associated with

clandestine laboratories. The program

provides a foundation from which a

comprehensive, multiagency response

can be developed at the State and

regional levels. Beginning in FY 1994,

Circle Solutions, Inc., building upon a

successful developmental and piloting

effort, implemented a program to

provide training and followup technical

assistance to State and local criminal

justice agencies and other public safety

agencies nationwide.

Assistance to Local Law Enforcement

Agencies Significantly Impacted by the

1996 Olympic Games

Grantee: Georgia Criminal Justice

Coordinating Council, Office of the

Governor; Atlanta, GA

The purpose of this program is to

assist local jurisdictions significantly

impacted by the public safety demands

of the 1996 Olympic Games in Georgia.

The program was funded to satisfy a

congressional earmark. Current

projections indicate that involved local

jurisdictions may incur in excess of

400,000 hours of unfunded overtime

costs as a result of the public safety

requirements for Olympic venues

throughout the metropolitan Atlanta

area and in sites outside Atlanta. This

grant will help defray the costs of

approximately 155,000 hours of

anticipated overtime requirements of

involved jurisdictions.

Regional Information Sharing System

Grantee: 6 sites nationwide

The Regional Information Sharing

System (RISS) Program supports

Federal, State, and local law

enforcement efforts to combat criminal

activity that extends across

jurisdictional boundaries. Six regional

RISS projects provide a broad range of

intelligence exchange and related

investigative support services to

member criminal investigative agencies

nationwide. The projects focus

primarily on narcotics trafficking,

violent crime, criminal gang activity,

and organized crime.

In FY 1996, the RISS Program will

complete electronic connectivity among

all projects, as well as other systems, to

better facilitate the collection,

dissemination and analysis of criminal

intelligence. Also in FY 1996, the RISS

projects will work with the National

Major Gang Task Force to encourage the

sharing and dissemination of gang

intelligence information between the

law enforcement and corrections

communities.

National White-Collar Crime Center

Grantee: West Virginia Office of the

State Auditor; Charleston, WV

The National White-Collar Crime

Center provides a national support

system for the prevention, investigation,

and prosecution of multijurisdictional

economic crimes. These white-collar

crimes include investment fraud,

telemarketing fraud, boiler room

operations, securities fraud,

commodities fraud, and advanced-fee

loan schemes. The Center’s mission

includes providing investigative support

services to assist in the fight against

economic crime, operating a national

training and research institute focusing

on economic crime issues, and

developing the Center as a national

resource in combating economic crime.

Adjudication

National Symposium on Sentencing

A national symposium on sentencing

to be presented by BJA, the State Justice

Institute, and the National Institute of

Justice, will enable judges, legislators,

prosecutors, defense counsel,

corrections officials, police, and

community representatives to discuss

and share experiences and perspectives

on current sentencing policy.

Trial Court Performance Standards and

Measurement System: Coordination

Efforts

Grantee: National Center for State

Courts; Williamsburg, VA

After 8 years of development and

testing, the Trial Court Performance

Standards and Measurement System

(TCPSM) has been completed and is in

the process of being adopted by

numerous jurisdictions. For example,

the Judicial Council of California has

adopted TCPSM as part of a new

Standard of Judicial Administration.

One of the most significant events in

judicial administration in the last 10

years, TCPSM comprises a set of 22

standards and 68 individual measures

for assessing trial court performance.

States urgently need technical

assistance to enable them to implement

the system. The National Center for

State Courts will provide that assistance

to State and local courts. BJA also will

be working with State agencies to

explore the possibility of using block

grants to assist State trial courts in fully

reviewing, adapting where appropriate,

and implementing TCPSM throughout

the State.

Community Prosecution and

Community Probation

Grantee: American Prosecutors Research

Institute; Alexandria, VA

The Community Prosecution and

Community Probation program consists

of the following four components:

Technical Assistance and Training

In FY 1993 and FY 1994, the

American Prosecutors Research Institute

(APRI) convened two focus groups of

experienced prosecutors who defined

community prosecution and identified

its key components. This information

provided BJA and APRI with the

framework to provide both intensive

and general technical assistance and to

produce several publications on the

subject. In FY 1994 and FY 1995, APRI

conducted two extremely well-received

technical assistance conferences

attended by over 75 prosecutors’ offices.

In FY 1996, APRI will continue its

technical assistance by matching

prosecutors with community

prosecution expertise with jurisdictions

now planning or implementing

community prosecution strategies. To

further inform prosecutors on issues

involving the planning, implementation,

and operation of a community

prosecution program, APRI will

convene a series of regional planning

workshops, an invitational symposium,

and a national conference. In addition,

APRI will provide intensive technical

assistance and conduct studies of three

demonstration sites, at least one of

which will implement a community

prosecution program in a jurisdiction

where a community policing program

already exists. APRI will compare,

contrast, and analyze each

demonstration site and disseminate a

report on the results. APRI will assist in

the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)

evaluation of BJA’s Community

Prosecution demonstration projects.

Demonstration Projects

BJA will provide limited funds to up

to three prosecutors’ offices to

implement the current strategies

discussed in the APRI Community

Prosecution Implementation Manual

and supporting documents. These

offices will be invited by BJA to submit

an application for funding. Preference

will be given to offices capable of

committing an equal amount of

resources to the project.

Community Probation

A significant segment of the

Community Prosecution and

Community Probation Program will be

devoted to community probation. BJA

will choose up to three demonstration

sites where APRI, or a consultant

working with APRI, will develop model

community probation programs. These

models will build upon recent BJA
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21247

accomplishments in its Community

Policing and Community-Focused

Courts programs and involve

partnerships with the police, the

judiciary, probation officials, public

defenders, and the community.

Preference will be given to applicants

who commit local resources to the

project.

Community-Focused Courts

The National Center for State Courts

(NCSC) in Williamsburg, Virginia, will

provide technical assistance to courts

interested in implementing

recommendations from both the

community-focused court’s agenda

currently under development by NCSC

and a consortium of court and

community organizations. This

followup program will explore

innovative technologies, such as the

Internet and videoconferencing, in

offering assistance; and it will provide

onsite assistance as needed. NCSC will

develop an evaluation instrument for

use by local universities to evaluate the

efforts of the community courts. The

program will complement ongoing BJA

efforts in the community prosecution

area and support existing local and State

partnership programs.

Models of Court-Based Services to

Children and Their Families

Grantee: National Center for State

Courts; Williamsburg, VA

As an outcome to the Office of Justice

Programs (OJP) task force on Childhood

Victimization, BJA and the National

Center for State Courts (NCSC) will

expand their current program ‘‘Models

of Court-Based Services to Children and

Their Families.’’ Funded by BJA and the

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, the program’s

purposes are to identify, document,

evaluate, and further develop effective

court-based service delivery to children

and their families. The major goal is to

improve collaboration among State trial,

juvenile, and family courts and public

health, mental health, and social

services. NCSC will study and help two

to three additional sites in the

identification and coordination of cases

involving child abuse and neglect and

domestic violence. As part of the new

effort, NCSC is looking at current sites

supported by private funding

organizations (i.e., the Kellogg

Foundation, the Casey Foundation, and

the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation)

to determine if the projects can be

augmented with a stronger court focus.

Assessment and Enhancement of

Indigent Defense Services

Grantee: National Legal Aid and

Defender Association; Washington,

DC

In FY 1994, BJA awarded the National

Legal Aid and Defender Association a

grant to reestablish a national scope

program to improve the defense

component of the criminal justice

system by providing State and local

organizations that represent indigent

defenders with quality training and

technical assistance services.

This program expands on training

events to enhance the quality of

indigent defense providers’

representation of drug and violent crime

defendants both to obtain the best

results for their clients and to reduce

recidivism. This program will also

support the expansion of the National

Clearinghouse for Defense Services. The

Clearinghouse is designed to respond to

inquiries from defenders, State officials,

the judiciary, and the general public

about the delivery of defense services

and substantive criminal defense issues.

The Clearinghouse compiles, assesses,

and disseminates information on proven

programs and on trends and innovative

strategies employed by indigent defense

services throughout the country. A

Clearinghouse Directory will be

available that includes a listing of the

files maintained and a summary of the

services available through the

Clearinghouse.

Statewide training programs that

focus on defense issues, the

development and use of diversion

programs, and sentencing alternatives to

incarceration will be expanded. In

addition to covering traditional legal

defense of a drug case, a training

manual presents a distinctive approach

to the defense of drug cases by

integrating and emphasizing concrete

strategies for treatment, intervention,

and prevention; the manual will

integrate guidelines for effective

representation. This program will

document the training practices used in

drug and violent crime cases.

Prosecutor’s Pre-Charging Diversion

Program

Grantee: Office of the Prosecuting

Attorney, Sixth Judicial District

Pulaski County; Little Rock, AK

This program expands a citywide

pilot project designed to reduce the

recidivism rate for youthful offenders.

An alternative to formal adjudication in

juvenile court, this program serves as an

opportunity for youthful offenders to

receive constructive restitution and

interact with community members.

Youth violence is addressed through an

interagency partnership that suspends

traditional barriers in the community

and creates a less threatening

environment. By offering programs,

opportunities, and services to at-risk

youth, this now countywide strategy

will document how neighborhood

organizations and community groups

are working to halt the rising rate of

juvenile crime.

Health Care Fraud Investigation and

Prosecution Training and Technical

Assistance

Grantee: National Association of

Attorneys General; Washington, DC

The continuation of this project will

enable the National Association of

Attorneys General (NAAG) to continue

providing national scope training and

technical assistance services to State

attorneys general and to other State and

local agencies involved in detecting,

investigating, and prosecuting intrastate

health care fraud. NAAG will work with

the three BJA-funded demonstration

sites to develop prototype strategies for

State attorneys general conducting

health care fraud prosecutions—

including health care consumer fraud,

Medicaid fraud, and fraud against

traditional insurance companies and

health maintenance organizations

(HMO’s).

NAAG will continue working closely

with State attorneys general and district

attorneys to provide cost-effective

training programs for prosecutors and

investigators and to develop innovative

prosecution strategies. Special emphasis

will be given to assisting the

demonstration site units in the

Maryland, Minnesota, and Wisconsin

Attorneys’ General offices. In

conjunction with an advisory group

comprised of Federal, State, and local

prosecutors, the project will identify

demonstrably successful initiatives, and

disseminate this information via a

bimonthly newsletter. The project also

will develop and publish a health care

fraud practice manual for State

prosecutors and develop a

clearinghouse of materials relating to

the prevention, detection, and

prosecution of health care fraud.

DNA Legal Assistance Unit

Grantee: American Prosecutors Research

Institute; Alexandria, VA

Beginning in FY 1995 with substantial

support from BJA, the American

Prosecutors Research Institute (APRI)

DNA Legal Assistance Unit has been

providing direct support to America’s

prosecutors in the understanding and

use of DNA typing technology to
21248 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

investigate and prosecute serious cases

such as capital murder, homicide,

sexual assault, and child abuse. APRI

has accomplished this task by providing

technical assistance, publications, and

training. Technical assistance activities

include formulation of a comprehensive

guide for direct and cross examination

in DNA cases; development of a

curriculum for training DNA analysts

and examiners on the proper

presentation of DNA evidence,

emphasizing testimony and etiquette;

and publication on a semiannual basis

of The Silent Witness, a newsletter that

bridges the gap between prosecutors and

DNA laboratories. Technical assistance

activities will be provided on a limited

basis and will include responding to

telephone requests, providing general

and specific case information packets,

and updating the Unit’s extensive files

of legal and scientific information.

Adjudication Focus Group

In March 1996, BJA conducted an

adjudication focus group whose primary

purpose was to identify and deliberate

issues and problems within the

adjudicative process of State and local

criminal justice systems. This focus

group did generate and discuss

innovative programs and new

approaches related to improving the

adjudicative process. Criminal justice

researchers and writers, Byrne Formula

Grant Program State administrators,

representatives from State and local

prosecutor and public defender offices,

justices and judges, parole and

probation officers, and the funding

community all contributed to increasing

the quality and quantity of future BJA

adjudication training, technical

assistance, and demonstration programs.

Later this year, BJA expects to issue

one or more Requests for Proposal

soliciting proposals from State and local

adjudication components and/or private

nonprofit organizations to implement

one or more program ideas promulgated

by this focus group.

Corrections

Correctional Options—National

Dissemination

The 1990 Amendments to the Crime

Control Act provided BJA with the

statutory authority to establish a

comprehensive assistance program to

develop ‘‘correctional options’’ at the

State and local levels. In exercising this

authority, BJA awards demonstration

grants, provides technical assistance,

and evaluates the results of intervention

projects for youthful offenders likely to

become career criminals.

BJA’s correctional options projects

assist offenders in pursuing a lawful and

productive transition to the community

following release by providing security,

discipline, and comprehensive services,

including diagnosis, counseling,

substance abuse treatment, education,

job training, and placement assistance

while under correctional supervision;

and linkage to similar services in the

community. These projects also provide

work opportunities to promote the

development of industrial and service

skills.

The expected results of the

correctional options projects include

reduced criminal recidivism of

offenders who receive alternative

punishments and, in the longer term,

reduced costs in correctional services

and facilities.

For the purposes of this program, the

term ‘‘correctional options’’ includes

community-based incarceration,

weekend incarceration, correctional

boot camps, transitional programs,

aftercare services, day reporting,

structured fines, electronic monitoring,

intensive probation, and other

innovative sanctions designed to have

maximum impact on offenders capable

of being managed in an environment

other than a traditional correctional

facility.

During a 4-year period, from FY 1992

through FY 1995, BJA awarded more

than $40 million in Correctional

Options Discretionary Program grants to

public agencies and private nonprofit

organizations. These grants were

awarded to support the planning,

development, implementation, and

evaluation of demonstration projects to

test a broad range of alternatives to

traditional modes of incarceration. All

BJA correctional options demonstration

projects have four basic goals: reduced

incarceration costs, relief of prison and

jail crowding, reduced recidivism rates

for youthful offenders, and

advancement in correctional practices.

BJA has worked closely with State

and local criminal justice professionals

in project planning, design, and

operation; coordination of technical

assistance and evaluation services;

monitoring of operations and outcomes;

and facilitation of project refinement

and improvements. A critical factor in

measuring the outcomes of these

projects has been the degree to which

demonstration sites have been

successful in selecting offenders who

would have been incarcerated had the

correctional options projects not

existed.

Preliminary findings from the

evaluation of these projects indicate that

offenders admitted to these programs

pose considerable challenges to

treatment efforts because of their young

age, lack of education, poor job skills,

low rates of employment, lack of social

stability, history of drug abuse, and

extensive record of prior arrests and

convictions.

However, these projects are successful

in delivering badly needed services to a

high-risk offender population, offering

far more services and supervision than

normally are provided for similarly

situated offenders who are in prison or

who are assigned to probation or parole.

States like Florida, Maryland, New

Hampshire, and Vermont have

succeeded in reaching their goal of cost

effectiveness by targeting offenders who

otherwise would have spent a

considerable amount of time in custody.

Model Correctional Options Projects

The following projects have been

selected as BJA correctional options

models and will serve as resource sites

for a National Correctional Options

Dissemination, Training, and Technical

Assistance Program:

Washington State Reintegration of

Youthful Offenders

Maricopa County (AZ) Youthful

Offenders Project

Bradenton (FL) Correctional Treatment

Facility Drug Punishment Program

Maryland Community Supervision and

Transitional Services

New Hampshire Intensive Correctional

Services

Vermont Restorative Justice Services

Connecticut Female Addictive

Services—Fresh Start

California Youth Authority Project

LEAD

Riverside County (CA) Twin Pines

Academy

Focus Group: Linking Byrne Formula

and Discretionary Grant Programs

A recent analysis of the annual needs

assessments conducted through the

Byrne Formula Grant Program indicated

that the two areas of greatest need at the

State and local levels are alternatives to

incarceration and offender treatment

services.

In December 1995, BJA convened a

focus group meeting with

representatives from a number of

successful State and local correctional

options projects and from the State

Administrative Agency for the Byrne

Formula Grant Program in these same

jurisdictions. The purpose was to obtain

ideas and insights regarding the

development of a Correctional Options

Dissemination Program for the FY 1996

Byrne Discretionary Program Plan; as

well as potential funding through the

Byrne Formula Grant Program and other
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21249

public and private funding sources to

support State and local correctional

options.

The FY 1996 National Technical

Assistance and Dissemination Initiative

for Correctional Options will build on

the input from the planning meeting

and will encourage States to support

new correctional options projects with

Byrne formula grants and to use these

Byrne formula funds to leverage

additional funding sources.

FY 1996 Awards

Technical Assistance, Dissemination,

and Training To Promote Correctional

Options

Grantee: Criminal Justice Associates;

Philadelphia, PA

This continuation of the current

award will support the technical

assistance needs of the ongoing

correctional options projects: the 9

demonstration projects that were

awarded on September 30, 1995; the 10

projects that BJA considers models; and

the FY 1994 awards to Wilmington,

Delaware, and Washington, D.C.

The continuation award will also

support a national dissemination and

technical assistance initiative that

builds upon the lessons learned through

the BJA Correctional Options Program

regarding project planning,

development, implementation, and

evaluation. The initiative will support

efforts to use Byrne Formula Grant

Program funds and other public and

private funding sources to support the

implementation of Correctional Options

projects at the State and local levels.

The grantee will work closely with the

program evaluator and will assist in the

dissemination of information to key

decisionmakers who can influence the

development and funding of

correctional options at the State and

local levels. The award also will support

the involvement of a consortium of

service providers.

Impact Evaluation of 10 Demonstration

Sites

Grantee: The National Council on Crime

and Delinquency; Washington, DC

This is a 15-month continuation

award focusing on outcome measures

and publications regarding the cost

effectiveness of selected correctional

options projects, as compared with

traditional incarceration. The evaluation

will be interactive with both the

demonstration sites and the technical

assistance providers, it will include

feasibility assessment activities to

determine the evaluability of project

design and, as appropriate, technical

advice on project adjustments to

improve operations and outcomes.

In addition to the dissemination of

correctional options, BJA will continue

to expand its support for programs that

demonstrate productive work and

employment preparedness services for

prison and jail inmates, offenders

participating in community-based

correctional options programs, and exoffenders.

Prison Industry Enhancement Technical

Assistance

Grantee: Correctional Industries

Association; Philadelphia, PA

This continuation award will enable

BJA to maintain the current level of

effort regarding Prison Industry

Enhancement (PIE) technical assistance,

training, and annual program audits. In

addition, the award will support the

development of revised PIE regulations

and guidelines, extension of single PIE

certification authority to encompass all

State prisons and local jails, two annual

meetings, and the development of

marketing plans to promote expansion

in the number of active PIE projects.

Jail Work and Industries

Grantee: Community Resource Services;

Gaithersburg, MD

This continuation award will enable

BJA to continue providing technical

assistance and program planning

support to reduce inmate idleness

through the development of productive

work opportunities in local jails,

including Prison Industry Enhancement

(PIE)-certified private sector

employment.

Project Return

Grantee: Tulane University; New

Orleans, LA

With strong support from the New

Orleans Business Council, Project

Return provides employment readiness

training and support services to exoffenders. Drug and alcohol counseling,

remedial education, life skills training,

vocational training, job placement

services, and family counseling are

provided to 200 participants per year.

Opportunity To Succeed Program:

Center on Addiction and Substance

Abuse

Grantee: Columbia University; New

York, NY

The Opportunity to Succeed (OPTS)

program provides intensive services for

addicted ex-offenders who received

drug treatment while incarcerated and

are returning on probation or parole to

their communities in Kansas City, St.

Louis, Tampa, Oakland, and New York

City. The program goal is to sustain

treatment gains and achieve a positive

reintegration into the community by

providing substance abuse treatment,

case management, employment, and

training, housing, family intervention,

health services, and mental health

services. Services are structured,

coordinated, and monitored by case

managers working for community based

organizations.

Evaluation, Systems Improvement, and

Information Dissemination

The Denial of Federal Benefits Program

Contractor: Network Systems

Integration; Washington, DC

The Denial of Federal Benefits

Program was established to implement

Section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse

Act of 1988 (Subpart G of Public Law

100–690). This law offers an option to

judges in both Federal and State courts

to deny Federal benefits to persons

convicted of trafficking in or possession

of drugs. It also provides for the

mandatory denial of Federal benefits to

individuals with three or more

convictions for trafficking offenses. In

February 1993, additional duties were

assigned to the Denial of Federal

Benefits Program in connection with the

implementation of the National Defense

Authorization Act of 1993. This law

provides for a point of contact—i.e., a

clearinghouse—from which defense

contractors may learn whether an

individual has been disqualified from

defense contract participation as a result

of a procurement fraud conviction.

The goals of the program are to

provide a sentencing option for Federal

and State judges to deny a Federal

benefit to a drug offender, a mechanism

to report such a denial of Federal

benefits, and a method to inform

Federal agencies of individuals

sentenced to a denial of Federal

benefits. The program objectives are to

enhance the use of denial of Federal

benefits as a sanction in sentencing

offenders convicted of a drug offense

and to enhance BJA’s capabilities to

more accurately and efficiently collect

offender data and improve processing of

this data from Federal and State sources.

The Denial of Federal Benefits

Program’s current operations include an

information dissemination component,

a systems management component, and

a program management and

coordination component.

Testing of Nebraska’s Victim Services

Needs Assessment Instrument

Grantee: Nebraska Commission on Law

Enforcement and Criminal Justice;

Lincoln, NE
21250 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

The purpose of the Victim Services

Needs Assessment instrument is to

assist the Nebraska Commission on Law

Enforcement and Criminal Justice in

assessing whether crime victim

assistance funds are being utilized in

the best way possible to address the

needs of crime victims. The goals in

testing the instrument are to assess the

effectiveness and efficiency of existing

services and to identify and formally

document services not currently

available but needed by victims of crime

in Nebraska.

The instrument consists of three

sections. Section 1, the Nebraska

Victimization Survey, is a statewide

victimization instrument designed to

determine geographical service gaps and

awareness of crime victim services and

evaluate attitudes toward crime and the

criminal justice system. The second

section, the Inventory of Victim

Assistance Programs In Nebraska, is

completed by victim assistance agencies

and identifies how the agency is funded,

who represents its client base, what

services are provided, and what services

are needed. Section 3, the Victim

Assistance Client Survey, is given to the

crime victim and identifies the types of

services provided by the agency; the

level of satisfaction with services

provided; the types of services the

victim felt were needed but were not

provided; and if the victims used other

agencies for services.

The instrument is service specific; it

is designated to be used by States and

local agencies. Once the instrument is

tested and finalized, it will be made

available to other States for their use.

The Office of Victims of Crime will

oversee instrument refinement.

An Initiative To Develop Model Internet

Applications for State and Local

Criminal Justice Agencies

Grantee: Illinois Criminal Justice

Information Authority; Chicago, IL

This initiative is being developed by

the Illinois Criminal Justice Information

Authority (ICJIA) and the University of

Illinois at Chicago. The purpose is to

develop model Internet applications

that will allow State and local criminal

justice agency users to access

information about programs and

resources that are available to combat

crime and violence. The goals of the

initiative are to develop model Internet

applications in the State and local

criminal justice community for the

electronic sharing and publishing of

criminal justice data and information.

The initiative involves information

technology, data and statistics, program

development, and research and

evaluation. ICJIA enlisted BJA, the

National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and

the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to

review and collaborate on the proposal

and determine its utility to State and

local criminal justice agencies. To

ensure that the ICJIA’s work is

responsive to the needs of State and

local agencies across the country,

SEARCH Group, Inc., the National

Criminal Justice Association, Justice

Research Statistics Association, BJA,

NIJ, and BJS all will consult on this

initiative.

U.S. Department of Justice Response

Center and BJA Clearinghouse

Contractor: Aspen Systems, Inc.

The BJA Clearinghouse continues to

serve as an information and

dissemination source for the criminal

justice field. BJA also supports the U.S.

Department of Justice (DOJ) Response

Center, which provides timely and

accurate information on DOJ initiatives.

Report Publication and Dissemination

This initiative enables BJA to produce

and disseminate information to the

criminal justice field about state-of-theart programs and activities, and to

improve the criminal justice system

through development of publications

and other media materials.

State and Local Training and Technical

Assistance Program

Contractor: Community Research

Associates; Nashville, TN

The purpose of the BJA State and

Local Training and Technical

Assistance Program is to provide

training and technical assistance to

States, units of local government, and

recognized Native American Indian

Tribes in the development and

implementation of comprehensive

systemwide strategies for preventing

and combating drug-related and violent

crime, and in the improvement of the

function of State and local criminal

justice systems. Although developed

primarily to support BJA’s Formula

Grant Program, training and technical

assistance can also be extended to BJA

discretionary grantees and, in certain

instances, to other facets of the U.S.

Department of Justice (e.g., in response

to requests from U.S. Attorneys).

Evaluation Program

The goal of BJA’s Evaluation

component is to identify criminal

justice programs of proven effectiveness

and to disseminate information about

these programs, so that other

jurisdictions throughout the country can

replicate them. Results of BJA program

evaluations guide the formulation of

policy and programs within Federal,

State, and local criminal justice

agencies. BJA coordinates the

development of evaluation guidelines

with the National Institute of Justice

(NIJ). In addition, NIJ conducts

comprehensive evaluations of selected

programs receiving discretionary and

formula grant funds from BJA.

Each applicant for State Byrne

Formula Grant Program funds is

required to include in its project plan an

evaluation component that meets the

BJA/NIJ evaluation guidelines. Each

State is required to provide BJA with an

annual report that includes a summary

of its grant activities and an assessment

of the impact of these programs on the

needs identified in its statewide drug

and violent crime control strategy.

Applicants for Byrne Discretionary

Grant Program funding are required to

include an evaluation component in

their applications and agree to conduct

required evaluations according to

procedures and terms established by

BJA.

SEARCH National Training and

Technical Assistance Program

Grantee: SEARCH Group, Inc. (National

Consortium for Justice Information

and Statistics); Sacramento, CA

The SEARCH National Training and

Technical Assistance Program, created

in 1986, offers assistance to criminal

justice agencies across the country in

the development, improvement,

acquisition, and/or integration of their

computer systems (e.g., records and case

management, computer-aided dispatch,

and criminal history records systems).

SEARCH provides onsite, no-cost

training and technical assistance to

justice agencies. It also offers services at

the National Criminal Justice Computer

Laboratory and Training Center located

in Sacramento, California.

Public Safety Support Services: National

Training and Technical Assistance for

Law Enforcement Line of Duty Deaths

Grantee: Concerns of Police Survivors,

Inc.; Camdenton, MO

The Public Safety Officers’ Benefits

Act (42 U.S.C. 3796 et seq.) authorizes

the Director of BJA to support national

programs that assist families of public

safety officers killed in the line of duty.

Since 1984, Concerns of Police

Survivors, Inc. (COPS) has implemented

programs to provide psychological

support and practical guidance to law

enforcement agencies and families that

have lost an officer in the line of duty.

BJA has identified the need to: update

research on law enforcement agencies’

readiness to handle line-of-duty deaths;

provide training and technical
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21251

assistance to better prepare law

enforcement agencies to intervene

effectively with families and coworkers

of officers killed in the line of duty; and

increase dissemination of information

about the services and benefits available

to the families of fallen officers and

about the resources available to assist

agencies.

BJA will survey law enforcement

agencies regarding their written policies

and procedures on responding to lineof-duty deaths. In addition, input and

reaction will be sought from surviving

family members concerning the

treatment accorded them by the

deceased family member’s agency. The

survey will provide some measure of the

impact BJA and other organizations

have had over the past 11 years in

improving agency response to line-ofduty deaths.

National Institute of Justice Research

Plan 1995–1996

For substantive questions regarding

specific Goals, please contact the

appropriate Program Manager. Names

and telephone numbers of all Program

Managers are listed at the end of each

Goal. For general NIJ information,

contact Carrie Smith, at (202) 616–3233.

For information about the Violent

Crime Control and Law Enforcement

Act of 1994 (Crime Law), contact the

Department of Justice Response Center,

at (202) 307–1743 or (800) 421–6770.

To inquire about NIJ receipt of

applications, contact Louise Loften, at

(202) 307–2965.

For document publication

information, contact Mary Graham, at

(202) 514–6207. For general information

about NIJ programs and funding

opportunities, and application

procedures; for requests for reprints,

literature, final reports, funded grants

on related topics, etc.; for names of

researchers or practitioners working on

related topics, contact the National

Criminal Justice Reference Service

(NCJRS), at (800) 851–3420.

The NIJ 1995–96 Research Plan is also

available electronically via the National

Criminal Justice Reference Service

Bulletin Board System. You can access

the Bulletin Board through the Internet

(telnet to ncjrsbbs.aspensys.com or

gopher to ncjrs.aspensys.com 71) or

through a modem (set at 9600 baud and

8–N–1; dial 301–738–8895). The NIJ

Research Plan is listed under the

‘‘National Institute of Justice

Information’’ menu.

For Internet access information, email lively@justice.usdoj.gov.

National Institute of Justice Staff

Jeremy Travis, Director

Office of the Director

Margaret Battle

Chriss Wetherington

Christy Visher

Planning and Management Division

Carol Petrie, Director

Sheila Parker-Darby

Denise Gadson

Carrie Smith

Office of Research and Evaluation

Sally T. Hillsman, Director

Louise Lofton

Evelyn Washington

Criminal Behavior

Edwin W. Zedlewski, Acting Director

Bernie Auchter

Laurie Bright

Thomas Feucht

Helen Girma

Voncile Gowdy

Ginger Kyle

Pamela Lattimore

Jordan Leiter

Angela Moore

Jack Riley

James Trudeau

Crime Control and Prevention

Winnie Reed, Acting Director

Julianna Banks

Stephanie Bourque

Steven Edwards

Stephen Holmes

Eric Jefferis

Robert Kaminski

Robert Langworthy

Nancy Lavigne

Richard Lewis

Phyllis McDonald

Lois Mock

Rosemary Murphy

Jeffrey Ross

Richard Titus

Office of Science and Technology

David G. Boyd, Director

Raymond L. Downs

Kevin Jackson

Richard M. Rau

Robert Tolle

Office of Communication and Research

Utilization

Virginia Baldau, Acting Director

Tamara Ross

Reference and Dissemination Division

John Schwarz, Director

Mary Graham

Eugene Hebert

G. Martin Lively

Daniel Tompkins

Research Applications and Training

Division

John Spevacek, Acting Director

Cheryl Crawford

Marilyn Moses

Carolyn Peake

Samuel McQuade

John Thomas

Table of Contents

From the Director

Contacts

National Institute of Justice Staff

Introduction

Goal I: Reduce Violent Crime

Goal II: Reduce Drug- and Alcohol-Related

Crime

Goal III: Reduce the Consequences of Crime

Goal IV: Improve the Effectiveness of Crime

Prevention Programs

Goal V: Improve Law Enforcement and the

Criminal Justice System

Goal VI: Develop New Technology for Law

Enforcement and the Criminal Justice

System

Administrative Guidelines

Application Information

Recommendations to Grant Writers

NIJ Policy Regarding Unsolicited Proposals

Requirements for Award Recipients

Application Forms

Introduction

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ)

is the research and development agency

of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Created in 1968 by Congress pursuant to

the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe

Streets Act, the Institute is authorized

to:

Sponsor research and development to

improve and strengthen the Nation’s

system of justice with a balanced

program of basic and applied research.

Evaluate the effectiveness of criminal

justice and law enforcement programs

and identify those that merit application

elsewhere.

Support technological advances

applicable to criminal justice.

Test and demonstrate new and

improved approaches to strengthen the

justice system.

Disseminate information from

research, development, demonstrations,

and evaluations.

This Plan signals the new

administrative direction that NIJ will

follow to achieve its research and

evaluation goals. Conceptually, the Plan

is the basis of NIJ’s pyramid of research.

It will be supplemented over the coming

months by a series of solicitations on

topics that speak to current or persistent

policy concerns that warrant research

investments. By their nature, those

solicitations will represent a somewhat

more focused part of this pyramid.

Intramural studies are at the apex of the

research pyramid. Questions with strong

policy orientation or immediate concern

may best be addressed by NIJ staff who

can interact directly with the

policymakers asking the questions.
21252 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

Readers of prior NIJ Plans will find

that this Plan has been substantially

shortened. Much of the traditional

background text has been discarded;

suggested research topics have been

reduced from paragraphs to phrases.

This change in style, however, implies

no change in the kinds of research being

sought. NIJ believes that this

abbreviated format is more consistent

with the spirit and intent of the Plan as

a vehicle to encourage the field to

submit original ideas on a wide range of

research issues.

Focused solicitations will appear

intermittently over the next year. These

will address more specific topics for

which special funding is available.

Certain activities funded under the

Violent Crime Control and Law

Enforcement Act of 1994 (Crime Law)

will be focal points—specifically,

community policing, violence against

women, boot camps, and drug courts—

as will evaluations of selected Bureau of

Justice Assistance programs. NIJ will

also initiate solicitations in

collaborative arrangements with other

Federal agencies, as well as for topics

that NIJ believes merit special attention

for the development of knowledge.

These solicitations will be announced

through the Federal Register and other

NIJ communications channels including

the Internet (the Department of Justice

and NCJRS Online) and special

mailings. Interested applicants should

telephone the National Criminal Justice

Reference Service (NCJRS) at 800–851–

3420 or e-mail

askncjrs@ncjrs.aspensys.com for

pending releases and dates of

announcement.

Partnerships are another new priority

for the Institute. NIJ believes that many

of today’s crime problems require

solutions that extend beyond criminal

justice boundaries. The Institute has

been active in discussions with other

Federal agencies and private

foundations and has established a

variety of collaborative relationships.

Some of these will manifest themselves

in the form of special solicitations on

specific topics or programs. Others will

simply encourage collaborative or

interdisciplinary research and offer the

prospect of joint funding. Still others

will result in the development of shared

research agendas. NIJ encourages

researchers from all disciplines to

explore the opportunities for

collaborative efforts presented in this

Plan and subsequent announcements,

and to propose arrangements that they

are able to construct beyond those

mentioned. NIJ particularly encourages

coordination of research applications

with submissions in other OJP agency

Plans.

An organizational change has also

occurred. The factors that distinguish

‘‘research’’ from ‘‘evaluation’’ are subtle

and secondary to the substance of the

issues. Therefore, the Institute has

merged these functions into a single

Office of Research and Evaluation that

will review submissions for both areas.

The Plan invites proposals for a range of

funding amounts. It includes a category

of small grants (less than $50,000)

across all goals and subjects. Readers

should consult the administrative

sections of the Research Plan for

additional information on the

differences in application requirements.

Six Strategic Long-Range Goals

In FY 1993, the Institute set forth six

long-range goals as the focus of NIJ

research, evaluation, and development

in the coming years. The creation of this

long-range agenda was well received; a

large number of research and evaluation

proposals were submitted, providing an

interdisciplinary framework for 1994.

In this 1995–96 Research Plan, the

Institute specifies the research,

evaluation, and technology projects that

NIJ anticipates supporting under each

goal. The numeric order of the goals

does not indicate levels of priority for

the Institute.

Many of the special grant programs

for individuals—such as the Data

Resources Program, various Fellowship

programs, the NIJ Internship Program—

are now described in a separate

publication, which will be announced

in the Federal Register.

NIJ solicits research and evaluations

to develop knowledge that will further

these long-range goals:

I. Reduce violent crime.

II. Reduce drug- and alcohol-related

crime.

III. Reduce the consequences of crime.

IV. Improve the effectiveness of crime

prevention programs.

V. Improve law enforcement and the

criminal justice system.

VI. Develop new technology for law

enforcement and the criminal justice

system.

Studies that involve the use of

randomized experimental designs are

encouraged, as are multiple strategies

for data collection, and well-controlled,

quasi-experimental designs and

equivalent comparison group designs.

Qualitative studies, including

ethnographic data collection, are also

encouraged.

Research Collaborations

NIJ encourages joint research and

evaluation projects with other Federal

agencies and private foundations

interested in crime and criminal justice

issues. Applicants may wish to consider

whether their proposed project might

lend itself to joint funding with another

agency or foundation. Applicants

interested in exploring possible

partnerships should contact the

potential partner agency directly, or the

relevant NIJ program manager, to

discuss specific topics for possible

collaborative projects. NIJ has entered

into memorandums of agreement or is in

other ways collaborating with the

Departments of Defense, Education,

Energy, Health and Human Services,

Housing and Urban Development, and

Treasury. Agencies and foundations that

have indicated a desire to collaborate

with NIJ on projects of mutual interest,

or are currently involved in joint

research efforts with NIJ, include:

Agencies

Advanced Research Projects Agency

(DOD)

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and

Firearms

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention

Center for Mental Health Services

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment

Corrections Program Office (OJP)

Drug Courts Program Office (OJP)

National Aeronautics and Space

Administration

National Institute of Mental Health

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and

Alcoholism

National Institute of Corrections

National Institute on Drug Abuse

National Science Foundation

Office of Community-Oriented Policing

Services (DOJ)

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

Office of Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation (HUD)

Office of National Drug Control Policy

Office for Victims of Crime

State Justice Institute

Violence Against Women Program

Office (OJP)

Foundations

The Annie E. Casey Foundation

The Carnegie Corporation of New York

The Ford Foundation

The Daniel and Florence Guggenheim

Foundation

The J.C. Kellogg Foundation

The John D. and Catherine T.

MacArthur Foundation

The Pew Charitable Trusts

The Prudential Foundation

The Ronald McDonald Foundation

The Rockefeller Foundation

The Institute cannot guarantee that

joint funding for research and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21253

evaluation projects will be forthcoming

from these sources. Applicants should

consider whether their proposals are in

accord with the goals of these agencies

and private foundations.

Specific information about applying

for Institute grants is contained in the

section ‘‘Administrative Guidelines.’’

Goal I: Reduce Violent Crime

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage research and evaluation

projects spanning six broad areas:

family violence, violence against

women, homicide, firearms and

violence, gangs, and juvenile violence.

Through this solicitation the National

Institute of Justice (NIJ) expects to

support research that will improve the

criminal justice knowledge base on

crimes and criminal behavior that

increasingly concern the public.

Background

Violent crime is a leading concern

among the American public today.

According to the National Crime

Victimization Survey (NCVS), in 1992

there were 6.6 million violent

victimizations in the United States—

including 141,000 rapes, 1.2 million

robberies, and 5.3 million assaults. The

violent crime rate is steadily increasing,

especially among juveniles, and in 1992

was the highest ever recorded for blacks;

homicide is now the leading cause of

death for young black males.

Handguns are a major factor in the

increasing violence, especially in the

commission of homicide. Of the 23,760

murders reported to the FBI in 1992,

handguns were used in 55 percent. One

of the most critical issues in any

consideration of ways to reduce

violence and its consequences is the

role firearms play in contributing to

violent crime, serious injury, and death.

The NCVS estimates the rate of nonfatal

handgun victimizations in 1992 at 4.5

crimes per 1,000 persons aged 12 or

older—the highest such figure on

record. Findings from an NIJ and Office

of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP) study of incarcerated

juveniles and inner-city high school

students showed that 83 percent of

inmates and 22 percent of students had

possessed guns, with 55 percent and 12

percent respectively having carried guns

all or most of the time.

Between 1988 and 1992, arrests of

juveniles for violent crimes increased by

47 percent—more than double the

increase for persons 18 years of age or

older. Over the same period, juvenile

arrests for homicide increased by 51

percent and statistics on weapons law

violations indicate that juvenile use of

guns has increased dramatically.

Spousal abuse commonly comes to

mind when violence against women is

discussed, but violence against women

is much broader. According to the

NCVS, more than 2.5 million women

experience violence each year; nearly

two in three female victims of violence

were related to or knew their attacker;

about a third were injured as a result of

the crime; nearly half the victims of rape

believed the offender to have been

under the influence of drugs or alcohol

at the time of the attack. The issue has

emerged as a topic of national interest

and led to the inclusion of the Violence

Against Women Act (VAWA) in the

1994 Crime Law.

The Crime Law contains many other

provisions directed toward the

prevention, control, and reduction of

violent crimes—enhancements for law

enforcement, correctional facilities, and

drug treatment options; restrictions on

firearms; provisions to deal with

juvenile crime and gangs; and increases

in the programs and research about

family violence as well as violence

against women.

Through this general solicitation NIJ

encourages studies that will address

these areas of broad general concern and

that examine the specific priorities

identified in the 1994 Crime Law,

particularly with regard to violence

among juveniles and the illegal

possession and use of firearms. The

Institute is especially interested in

filling critical gaps in current

knowledge and identifying and

evaluating existing programs of crime

prevention and control.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

areas that could advance criminal

justice knowledge and practice under

Goal I of the NIJ Research Plan.

Individuals are encouraged to suggest

their own topics of interest. Research is

encouraged in, but not limited to, the

following areas:

Studies of Offenders and Offenses.

Criminal careers of offenders who

engage in violent crime, including risk

and protective factors, and initiation,

frequency, and termination patterns.

Studies of specific offenses and

offenders, including robbery, sexual

assault, child sexual assault, stalking,

and homicide. Offender perceptions of

criminal justice response to violent

offenders. Juvenile violence, including

escalation patterns, racial conflicts, and

influence of peers and gangs. Family

violence involving intimate partners,

spouses, children, and elders.

Violent Situations. Role of gangs and

group offending in criminal violence.

Studies of patterns in violent events,

including triggering events, situational

elements, and predisposing influences.

Protective factors in neighborhoods and

communities at high risk of violence.

Violence in specific situations and

locations including schools, families,

recreational settings, and the workplace.

Firearms Violence. Adult and juvenile

patterns of gun availability, sources of

guns, and use in violent crime. Role of

illegal markets in weapons on patterns

of firearms violence, especially among

juveniles. Impact of firearms laws on

gun crimes, substitution of other

weapons, and offense patterns.

Feasibility studies of innovative

firearms regulations.

Responses to Violent Offenders.

Differentiating system responses to

violence from responses to other crimes.

Violence prevention. Evaluation of

innovative programs and practices.

Evidentiary concerns, including

uncooperative witnesses. Management

of violent offenders on probation and

parole including risk assessment,

treatment programs, and community

supervision.

Family Violence. Improving the

criminal justice (police, prosecution,

courts) response to family violence.

Interdisciplinary research on the origins

of spouse assault. Child homicide and

fatality review teams. Links between

partner abuse and child abuse.

Evaluation of innovative programs and

practices for responding to elder abuse.

Effectiveness of stalking legislation. In

addition to family violence research, NIJ

also will issue a special solicitation in

1996 requesting evaluations and

research of selected topics covered

under the Violence Against Women Act.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. To

obtain specific information on the

programs described under this goal,

potential applicants may contact:

Bernard Auchter, (202) 307–0154, for

family violence and violence against

women. Lois Mock, (202) 307–0693, for

firearms violence. Winifred Reed, (202)

307–2952, for gangs. James Trudeau,

(202) 307–1355, for studies of offenders

and offenses, violent situations, and

responses to violent offenders.

Goal II: Reduce Drug- and AlcoholRelated Crime

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage research and evaluation
21254 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

projects that will improve the criminal

justice knowledge base about crimes

and criminal behavior involving the use

of drugs and alcohol. Through this

solicitation NIJ seeks to clarify further

the relationship between substance

abuse and crime and to reduce drugand alcohol-related crime.

Background

Substance abuse and drug-related

crimes continue to affect the lives of

countless Americans residing in both

urban and rural neighborhoods across

the Nation. NIJ’s Drug Use Forecasting

(DUF) data show an increase in

marijuana use and relatively stable but

high levels of major addictive substance

use among booked arrestees in the 23

urban areas monitored by DUF. Recent

data from the Drug Abuse Warning

Network (DAWN) indicate that the use

of heroin and cocaine is on the rise.

Efforts to prevent and reduce drugrelated crime, and thereby improve the

quality of life in these areas, continue to

occupy the criminal justice community.

Alcohol is used by both offenders and

victims in a significant proportion of

violent events, with documented

connections between both situational

and chronic drinking and aggressive or

violent behavior. The National Academy

of Sciences Panel on the Understanding

and Control of Violent Behavior has

called for more research into the role of

alcohol in promoting violent events,

particularly since little is known about

how alcohol and violence may reinforce

one another or how the alcohol-violence

relationship may vary depending on

type of violence.

The criminal justice system is the

largest single source of external pressure

influencing abusers who otherwise

would not enter substance abuse

treatment programs. Half or more of the

admissions to community-based

residential and outpatient substance

abuse treatment programs are offenders

on probation or parole. Criminal justice

referral to treatment relieves courts and

prisons of overcrowding and reduces

the high cost of continued incarceration,

while providing an added degree of

supervision beyond what probation or

parole offices may be able to afford.

When successful, treatment further

reduces criminal justice costs by

breaking the pattern of recidivism that

brings typical substance abusers back

into the criminal justice system again

and again.

Research on criminal justice-involved

populations suggests that substance

abuse treatment can be effective in

reducing substance abuse and criminal

activity while the client is in treatment

and for some time thereafter. As

substance abuse programs are

implemented, it is important to provide

critical feedback on how they are

working and for whom they are most

effective. It is also important to

determine how best to provide

treatment—through public criminal

justice agencies or through private

treatment agencies under contract.

Substance abuse prevention programs

continue to proliferate in response to

public concerns. Comprehensive

substance abuse programs for youths

can promote anti-drug social norms and

thereby reduce or prevent the use of

cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, heroin,

and cocaine. NIJ seeks to evaluate

comprehensive community-based

substance abuse programs that develop

partnerships among criminal justice and

schools, health centers, families, peers,

and media. NIJ’s Drug Use Forecasting

(DUF) program gathers offense and drug

use information from samples of adult

and juvenile arrestees at 23 sites

nationwide, providing access to a

national sample of arrestees within

hours of arrest. Along with a brief,

voluntary interview, urine specimens

are obtained to test for evidence of

recent use of drugs. For 7 years, data

from NIJ’s DUF program have traced the

trends in drug use among persons

arrested for a wide range of offenses. In

1995, NIJ began soliciting proposals that

capitalized and expanded upon the

research potential provided through the

DUF program’s quarterly collection of

interviews and urine specimens from

samples of adult and juvenile arrestees

brought to jails in 23 cities nationwide.

Researchers are encouraged to

develop proposals that present

innovative ways of utilizing the DUF

program as a research ‘‘platform’’ for

pursuing a wide range of hypotheses

related to drug use and criminal

activity. For instance, in collaboration

with existing DUF sites, the basic data

collection protocol could be

supplemented with additional interview

assessments or bio-assays. NIJ is also

interested in proposals that examine

specific research questions by applying

the DUF protocol to targeted samples of

arrestees such as those in suburban or

rural jails, or those arrested for specific

offenses.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

areas that could advance criminal

justice knowledge and practices under

Goal II of the NIJ Research Plan.

Individuals are encouraged to suggest

their own topics of interest. Research is

encouraged in, but not limited to, the

following areas:

Substance Abuse and Criminal

Behavior. Relationships between drugs,

alcohol, and violence, including the

individual and environmental

circumstances. Relationship between

substance abuse and related criminal

behavior of all types, including family

violence. Understanding substance

abuse careers and how they track with

criminal careers over time. Inventory of

the validity, scope, and gaps in current

substance abuse data sets.

Substance Abusing Offenders and the

Criminal Justice System. Impact of

pretrial services, adjudication,

sentencing, and corrections (including

community corrections) programs.

Effect of strategies implemented in one

segment of the system on the rest of the

system. Offender attitudes, perceptions,

and experiences as they move through

particular components/programs.

Effective use of a series of graduated

sanctions for noncompliance behaviors.

Substance Abuse Prevention. Cost

benefit analyses. Impact of criminal

justice-based strategies on later

substance abuse and other related

criminal behavior. Development and

identification of demand-reduction

strategies and programs for high-risk

populations.

Treatment and Aftercare Evaluations.

Assessment of treatment drop-outs.

Determination of the optimal mix of

various treatment and after-care

components for various criminal justice

populations.

Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Research

Platform Initiatives. Expansion of adult

and juvenile research protocols to

address additional research questions

such as drug market analysis, drug

treatment history of arrestees, the onset

of drug use among arrestees, the

relationship between drug acquisition

and other criminal activities, and the

role of alcohol and drug consumption in

the commission of crimes.

Drug Enforcement. Research on the

effectiveness of interdiction efforts and

control strategies such as increased

penalties for drug trafficking in prisons

and drug dealing in drug-free school

zones.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. To

obtain specific information on the

programs described under this goal,

potential applicants may contact: Laurie

Bright, (202) 616–3624, for substance

abuse research and evaluations related

to the criminal justice system. Thomas

E. Feucht, (202) 307–2949, for substance

abuse research related to DUF research
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21255

platform initiatives. James Trudeau,

(202) 307–1355, for substance abuse

research related to criminal behavior.

Goal III: Reduce The Consequences of

Crime

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage research and evaluation

projects that explore the causes of

victimizations, their consequences in

injury, fear, property damage, and other

forms of cost; and the institutional

responses of criminal justice agencies to

victims. In addition to individual

victims, the Institute is interested in the

ways that households, organizations,

and communities become victims, and

how victimizations harm and otherwise

alter daily functioning. NIJ is also

interested in how victim service

institutions can best serve victims to

reduce the harm done. The goals of the

research solicited are to understand how

natural circumstances can lead to

victimizations, as well as the nature and

extent of harm caused by crime, and to

use these findings to reduce both

victimization risk and severity.

Background

The extent of criminal victimization

within the United States is disturbing:

In 1992, approximately 1 in every 4

households was victimized by 1 or more

crimes, and 1 in 20 had at least one

member age 12 or older who was the

victim of a violent crime. Violent crime

victimization rates, after declining

through most of the 1980’s, have again

begun to increase, most notably among

blacks and persons ages 12–24.

National public opinion surveys

consistently indicate that crime has

displaced other issues as the Nation’s

most serious concern. In a 1994 New

York Times/CBS News nationwide

telephone poll, 23 percent of

respondents listed crime as ‘‘the most

important problem facing this country

today,’’ and 40 percent said they live

within a mile of an area where they

would be afraid to walk alone at night.

The harm of victimization includes

injury, dollar loss, and a pervasive sense

of insecurity that disrupts and truncates

the victim’s daily activities and

satisfactions. This harm also touches

those close to or acquainted with the

victim. The victim’s needs are

imperfectly understood by researchers

and practitioners and are inadequately

responded to by available programs of

assistance. The victim’s dealings with

the criminal justice system often

compound the damage rather than

serving to restore the victim and create

a sense of justice.

We are limited in our understanding

of the antecedents and causes of

victimization. ‘‘Routine activities’’

research—that includes the victim along

with the offender, environment, and

‘‘guardians’’ has the potential to

improve the validity and effectiveness

of crime prevention programs. Such

research might examine specific types of

victims, specific activity domains, or

specific locations. A special emphasis

might be topics suggested by the

Violence Against Women Act, which is

discussed in Goal I.

The effects of crime reach far beyond

their impact on individuals and

households, extending into businesses,

public housing areas, neighborhoods,

and ultimately into entire communities.

Within the community, violent crime,

gangs and the threat they pose,

vandalism, drugs, and disorder may

cause businesses to close or relocate,

reduce employment and shopping

opportunities, and decrease property

values. Where this grim process is not

interrupted, urban neighborhoods and

communities decay, investments

dwindle or disappear, and law-abiding

residents and their organizations move

out.

Crimes against business range from

the armed robbery of a neighborhood

grocery to the electronic swindle of an

international corporation and include

such offenses as the theft of cash or

property (by customers, employees, and

suppliers), burglary, vandalism, billing

scams, embezzlement, extortion,

computer hacking, hijacking of

shipments, kidnaping, arson, and theft

of intellectual property. The cost of

crime to business is, of course,

ultimately borne by consumers,

employees, and residents of areas that

experience a decline because of crime’s

effect on local business.

Through this general solicitation NIJ

encourages studies that will address

these critical areas of citizen concern.

The Institute is particularly interested in

research that advances our knowledge of

the extent and consequences of criminal

victimization in the following areas:

assessing the harm caused by

victimization, improving the delivery of

services to victims and their treatment

by the criminal justice system,

increasing our understanding of the

causes and means of prevention of

victimization, improving data about the

victimization of businesses, and the

effects of crime and victimization on the

delivery of services in affected areas.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

topics that will advance criminal justice

knowledge of the extent, causes, and

consequences of criminal victimization

under Goal III of the NIJ Research Plan.

Individuals are encouraged to suggest

their own topics of interest. Research is

encouraged in, but not limited to, the

following areas:

Assessing Victim Needs. Diagnostic

instruments for use by victim services

providers that would assist staff intake

assessment of victim harm and required

services. Victim-based evaluations of

services.

Program Evaluations. Evaluations of

victim services programs in such areas

as restorative justice, use of computers

by victim services, incorporation of

victim services in community policing,

programs tailored to victims with

special needs, including child victims,

and local program compliance with

victim services mandated by State

legislation.

Criminal Justice System Response to

Victims. How treatment of victims and

witnesses by the criminal justice system

affects the public’s willingness to

cooperate with the system at all stages

of its processes.

Victimization Patterns. How routine

activities, behavior, perceptions, and

knowledge interact with situational

variables and offender behavior to

increase or lower the risk of

victimization. Knowledge that can

contribute to reducing the level of

victimization.

Impact of Crime on Business. The

quality of data on the costs of

victimization of business, its customers,

suppliers, and employees, and the

community. Priorities for new data

collection and the utility of the data for

combating crimes against business.

Impact of Crime on Service Delivery.

Effects of fear of crime and victimization

on the ability of communities, public

agencies, and nonprofit organizations to

provide services and meet the needs of

residents of affected neighborhoods.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. To

obtain specific information on the

programs described under this goal,

potential applicants may contact

Richard Titus, at (202) 307–0695.

Goal IV: Improve the Effectiveness of

Crime Prevention Programs

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage research and evaluation

projects that will increase the safety of

individuals within families, and in

schools, businesses, workplaces, and
21256 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

community environments; that will

advance the knowledge of criminal

justice practitioners and help prevent

crime and criminal behavior, and

develop and improve crime prevention

programs. NIJ seeks research and

evaluations aimed at preventing

involvement in crime, and individual,

community, and workplace efforts to

improve safety and security.

Background

Crime prevention takes many forms.

NIJ research in crime prevention

continues to focus on potential

offenders, potential victims, and

particular locations and emphasizes

both individual and community

responses to crimes that occur in

various settings. There is a need to

examine how certain characteristics of

neighborhoods, households, schools,

businesses, public housing

developments, parks and other public

areas promote or constrain criminal

activity. It is equally important to study

populations that may be especially

vulnerable, or invulnerable, to crime in

those locations. It is also important to

examine crime prevention programs and

strategies in the context of the

communities and jurisdictions in which

they are found.

Crime prevention can and should

focus on deterring potential offenders by

formulating strategies directed at highrisk groups that are likely to become

involved with the criminal justice

system. NIJ research emphasizes

prevention strategies that may influence

the attitudes and behaviors of persons

living in high-risk environments by

addressing their needs in a

comprehensive manner and by

promoting positive and constructive

forms of behavior. This approach to

crime prevention requires the

coordination of mutually reinforcing

efforts that involve the family, school,

and community as crime prevention

agents. Research has shown that efforts

to assist youths at risk are more likely

to be effective when they start early and

provide forms of intervention based on

an understanding of the developmental

processes that influence the attitudes

and behavior of youths over time.

Crime prevention programs can also

focus on potential victims of crime and

ways to prevent their victimization. A

major issue in prevention research is

how to influence the behavior of

individuals, households, organizations,

and community groups. Lessons learned

in studies of citizen patrols, changes in

physical design, the relationship

between fear and physical signs of

disorder, and the redeployment of

police officers, have all been

incorporated in national crime

prevention campaigns and in the

development of programs and strategies

designed to reduce crime victimization.

Citizens and community groups can

accept and respond to the challenge of

shared responsibility for community

security. Diverse crime prevention

efforts undertaken include means of

preventing victimization as well as ways

of addressing the personal and social

needs of victims resulting from crime

and drug abuse. In addition, citizen and

community anti-crime efforts are more

likely to be effective when they are part

of a comprehensive approach to

neighborhood problem solving that

involves citizens in a partnership with

police and other municipal agencies.

We have learned that crime can be

reduced through the proper design and

effective use of environmental crime

prevention methods in commercial

sites, public and private housing,

recreational areas, and transportation

systems. Research has underscored the

importance of incorporating

environmental strategies as key

components of community crime

prevention programs.

One possible way to protect people

from crime is to develop a more

thorough understanding of such factors

about offenders as how they select their

victims and targets; their modus

operandi during the commission of an

offense, including any involvement with

co-offenders; their methods of disposing

of noncash proceeds from crime; their

perceptions of the opportunity structure

of different locations, environments,

and situations; and their perceptions of

the criminal justice system’s

effectiveness in apprehending and

prosecuting them.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

areas that could advance crime

prevention knowledge and practice

under Goal IV of the NIJ Research Plan.

Individuals are encouraged to suggest

their own topics of interest. Research is

encouraged in, but not limited to, the

following areas:

Crime Prevention Programs for HighRisk Youths. (In coordination with the

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention). Development

of methods that foster positive and

constructive forms of behavior. Focus

on resilient youth and families.

Interaction between community, family

and individual factors in promoting

positive behavior.

Developing Community-Based Crime

Prevention Partnerships. Identification

of factors that enhance or diminish

partnerships. Development and testing

of strategies to revitalize and reclaim

high-crime areas. Ways to organize

community resources in an integrated

manner. How to develop useful

problem-solving strategies.

Location-Specific Crime Prevention

Programs. Schools and routes to and

from school. Public housing.

Commercial settings. Parks and

recreation facilities. Parking lots. Use of

traffic barriers for crime and drug

prevention. Understanding the actions

and responses of potential victims and

offenders in these and other settings.

(See Goal III: ‘‘Routine Activities and

Victimization’’ for a description of

victim-related research using the routine

activities approach). Focus on

environmental and design features.

Focus on a comprehensive approach.

Crimes and Offender Behavior.

Offender daily activity patterns. Offense

selection and planning. Target and

victim selection. Modus operandi

during the commission of an offense

including co-offending. Disposition of

noncash proceeds from crime. Offender

perception of criminal justice system

effectiveness. Disruption of stolen

property markets.

Crime By and Related to Illegal

Aliens. Recruitment, transportation, and

smuggling of illegal aliens into the

United States. Provision of false

documentation to illegals. Employers’

role in committing crimes related to

hiring illegals and fostering crime

among illegal aliens.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. For

specific information on the programs

described under this goal, potential

applicants may contact:

Rosemary Murphy, (202) 307–2959,

for school-based prevention programs,

crime prevention in public housing,

crime prevention partnerships and

prevention for high-risk youths.

Richard Titus, (202) 307–0695 for

location specific prevention (except

schools and public housing), crimes and

offender behavior, and crime by and

related to illegal aliens.

Goal V: Improve Law Enforcement and

the Criminal Justice System

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage efforts in research and

evaluation that will advance criminal

justice knowledge in the areas of

policing, prosecution, defense,

adjudication, and corrections. The

primary focus of research and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21257

evaluation under this goal is

improvement of the efficiency,

effectiveness, and fairness of the system.

Certain types of cases, however, take

priority. These involve violent juvenile

and adult offenders, drug and alcohol

abusers, and family violence offenders.

Also of interest are the consequences of

decisions and practices in one part of

the system on other criminal justice

agencies and on related social service

agencies. Through this solicitation, NIJ

also seeks a greater understanding of the

relationship among the offender, victim,

and the criminal justice system. All

issues surrounding the case are of

interest, but projects that focus on an

issue from the perspective of the various

participants—prosecutor, defender,

judge, legislator—are encouraged.

Background

Each part of the criminal justice

system faces new challenges. Juvenile

arrests for violent crimes increased by

47 percent between 1988 and 1992;

juvenile arrests for homicide increased

by 51 percent during the same period.

FBI data indicate that juvenile use of

guns has risen dramatically. Prosecutors

nationwide note that youthful offenders

are being brought to their offices in

increasing numbers.

The Nation’s prison and jail

population reached 1 million in the past

year, with more than 5 million persons

under some form of correctional

supervision. Data from jails and prisons

show a high incidence of substance

abuse disorders among inmates.

Approximately 70 percent of jail

detainees have a history of substance

abuse; 56 percent were under the

influence of drugs or alcohol at the time

of arrest.

A significant proportion of inmates

with drug abuse problems have a high

prevalence of other disorders. About 75

percent of inmates with mental

disorders, for example, are also

substance abusers. Other inmates abuse

both drugs and alcohol. Few programs

exist for such inmates who have special

needs. In most State prison systems, for

example, inmates may receive services

from either mental health or substance

abuse programs but not from programs

designed to treat those with both

conditions.

The 1994 Crime Law encourages

innovations to improve criminal justice

effectiveness in many of these areas,

including community policing; prison

construction and construction of

alternative facilities such as boot camps

for nonviolent offenders; and drug

courts that combine court-supervised

abstinence with outpatient treatment

and sanctions for those who fail to

comply. NIJ expects to issue separate

solicitations for research in these areas

in 1996.

White-collar and organized crime

pose a serious threat to the stable and

orderly functioning of society. These

complex and sophisticated crimes

threaten our economic stability, corrupt

legitimate institutions, and undermine

the public respect for government and

law.

Research is also needed on the

consequences of the decisionmaking

process within the criminal justice

system. Much criminal justice research

has been specific to a single criminal

justice agency, such as the decisions of

police in using deadly force, charging

decisions and plea bargaining practices

of prosecutors and use by judges of

intermediate sanctions. However, such

studies rarely focus on the relationship

among police, defense attorneys, public

prosecutors, and judges in plea or

sentence bargaining.

Moreover, much research on criminal

justice evaluates effectiveness in terms

of standards internal to a particular

agency rather than the consequences

that decisions and practices in one part

of the system have for other components

in the system or on system processes.

There are studies of jail and prison

overcrowding and of early release as a

result of judicially mandated standards

for maintaining correctional facilities,

but little is known about their

consequences for the criminal careers of

offenders who have been released early.

Likewise, there is little research on the

effect of sentence length or a given type

of sentence for any given offense.

Relatively little is known about how

different kinds of crime are detected and

selected by social service and other

agents and the processes by which they

are referred to law enforcement. NIJ

seeks research addressing these broader

issues.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

topics that could advance criminal

justice knowledge under Goal V of the

NIJ Research Plan. Individuals are

encouraged to suggest their own topics

of interest. Research is encouraged in,

but not limited to, the following areas:

Law Enforcement

Note: NIJ is accepting applications for

policing research during the June and

December, 1996 review cycles. The Institute

expects to issue a special policing solicitation

in FY 1996. Law enforcement research and

evaluation proposals received for the June

review will be considered together with

proposals submitted to the special policing

solicitation.

Prosecution, Defense, and Adjudication

Issues at the Pretrial Stage. Effective

release and detention decisions,

charging decisions, and diversion

decisions. Effective responses to witness

intimidation. Impact of variations in

discovery policy.

New Approaches. Specialized courts,

e.g. domestic violence, firearms

offenses. Community courts. Restorative

justice. Community-based prosecution

and defense services.

Drug Courts. Note: NIJ is not receiving

applications for research on drug courts

under the June and December 1995

deadlines. Instead, researchers should

await the special solicitation to be

issued in 1995, as noted above.

Juvenile Justice. (In coordination with

the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention.) Juvenile case

processing, emphasizing waiver to adult

courts. Diversion to noncriminal justice

programs. Postarrest preconviction

programs for chronic, serious juvenile

offenders.

Community and Institutional

Corrections

Sanctions and Punishments.

Operating community-based sanctions

as a system. Prosecutors’ role in

intermediate sanctions. Innovative

programs in domestic violence, child

abuse, firearms.

Meeting Offender Needs. Offenders

with mental health and drug addiction

conditions. Creating parity in services

for incarcerated women. Coordinating

transitional care and community

reintegration.

Preserving Safety. Planning and

managing ‘‘super’’ maximum security

prisons. Managing juvenile offenders in

adult facilities. Correctional officer

health and safety risks.

Managing Change. Understanding the

impacts of prison expansion.

Correctional management of changing

inmate populations. Inmate and

correctional officers’ safety. Managing

offenders in the community.

Systemwide Issues

Consequences of Decisions on System

Responses. The impact that reforms or

major resources changes in one part of

the system may have on another.

Perceived fairness of the criminal justice

system, particularly in minority

communities, and appropriate responses

by criminal justice professionals.

Sentencing. Costs and benefits of

various State sentencing reforms. Impact

of sentencing policy changes on

prosecution, defense, and the courts,

e.g. ‘‘truth in sentencing’’ and ‘‘three

strikes’’ legislation, abolition of parole,
21258 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

mandatory minimums, enhanced

sentencing schemes for juvenile

offenders.

Illegal Aliens. U.S. policy toward

arrested illegal aliens. Impact on local

criminal justice system. Links with

immigration. Management of foreign

language populations in correctional

settings.

White-Collar and Organized Crime.

For White-Collar Crime, research on the

prevention and control of health care

fraud, insider insurance fraud, and

environmental crime, including

regulatory issues, detention,

investigation, and prosecution. For

Organized Crime, research on the

criminal justice response to

international organized crime networks

and enterprise, and organized crime

corruption of legitimate industries and

markets.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. To

obtain specific information on the

programs described under this goal,

potential applicants may contact:

Lois Mock, (202) 307–0693, and

Winifred Reed, (202) 307–2952, for

policing.

Jordan Leiter, (202) 616–9487, for

prosecution and adjudication.

Voncile Gowdy, (202) 307–2951, for

corrections and sanctions.

Jack Riley, (202) 616–9030, for illegal

aliens and the criminal justice system.

Lois Mock, (202) 307–0693, for whitecollar and organized crime.

Goal VI: Develop New Technology for

Law Enforcement and the Criminal

Justice System

Purpose

The purpose of this solicitation is to

encourage technological development

projects that will improve the

operational efficiency of the criminal

justice system. Through this solicitation

NIJ expects to support research that will

enhance the safety and effectiveness of

law enforcement and correctional

officers and other officers of the court.

Background

Science and technology programs cut

across the entire range of criminal

justice issues and goals at NIJ; programs

already in progress or in the early stages

of planning and development promise

to provide significant benefits in the

21st century. The Institute’s science and

technology mission is accomplished

through three major program areas: the

collection and dissemination of

technical information, the development

of standards and operation of an

equipment testing program, and a

research and development grants

program.

To strengthen the collection and

dissemination of technology

information, NIJ is developing the

capabilities of the National Law

Enforcement and Corrections

Technology Center (NLECTC) (the

former Technology Assessment Program

Information Center) and establishing

regional law enforcement technology

centers. The purpose of these centers is

to provide criminal justice professionals

with information on available

technology, guidelines and standards for

these technologies, and technical

assistance in implementing them. These

centers will be linked through a

Technology Information Network (TIN)

to provide Federal, State and local

agencies with objective, reliable, and

timely information on technologies and

equipment, such as who are the

producers and users; where high-cost,

seldom-used equipment can be

borrowed for temporary or emergency

situations; what the current equipment

standards are; tests and evaluations; and

what safety, health, or procedure

bulletins have been issued. The TIN will

also link the centers with the current

Regional Information Sharing Service

(RISS) that will then create an overall

law enforcement technology exchange

network. NIJ has also established an

Office of Law Enforcement Technology

Commercialization (OLETC) to help

bring technology to the market place for

criminal justice procurement.

One of the most significant

developments of NIJ’s criminal justice

technology and standards program was

the development of soft body armor for

police officers and standards governing

its manufacture and sale. NIJ has also

developed standards for vehicle tracking

devices, security systems for doors and

windows, breath alcohol testing,

autoloading pistols, mobile antennas,

and other equipment. The Institute is

currently completing the development

of performance standards for two DNA

testing procedures: Restriction Fragment

Length Polymorphism (RFLP) and

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). The

standards program is funded by NIJ

through the Office of Law Enforcement

Standards (OLES) at the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST).

NIJ’s research and development

efforts have also been significant and

broad in scope in other areas. In the area

of forensic science, NIJ has supported a

wide range of research on fingerprints,

blood and semen, DNA, trace evidence,

bite marks, and forged or altered

documents. Further research is needed,

particularly in DNA testing, weapons

identification, fingerprinting, and trace

evidence. Progress is also being made to

develop alternatives to lethal force.

When confronted with the need to use

force, officers are limited to the use of

firearms, batons, physical ‘‘hands-on’’

restraint, or, more recently, chemical

agents such as pepper spray. To provide

alternatives, NIJ initiated a Less-ThanLethal technology program to develop

innovative, nonlethal measures suitable

for use in situations involving fleeing

suspects, domestic disturbances,

barricades, issuing search warrants,

drug raids, prison or jail disturbances,

etc.

This announcement also supports

research recommendations of the

Department of Justice (DOJ) and the

Department of Defense (DOD) under a

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

for interagency collaboration in

developing and sharing dual-use

technologies for law enforcement

agencies and military operations other

than war. Congress has appropriated

fiscal year 1995 funds for this program

through the Defense Authorization Bill.

The day-to-day management of the

program is carried out at the DOD

Advanced Research Projects Agency

(DARPA) under a Joint Program Steering

Group (JPSG) with equal numbers of

program managers from the Defense and

Justice Departments.

In soliciting research and

development topics, NIJ principally

focuses on technologies and studies that

will support the needs of State and local

criminal justice agencies. The Institute’s

science and technology research also

addresses the legal and social issues

related to the employment of new

technologies in order to ensure that they

will be acceptable to the agency and the

community.

Research Areas of Interest

Listed below are examples of research

areas under Goal VI of the NIJ Research

Plan where new or improved

technologies could enhance the efficacy

of the criminal justice system and

reduce the level of injuries and death

during policing and correctional

operations. Individuals are encouraged

to suggest their own topics of interest.

Projects should be directed toward the

production of affordable and practical

equipment or systems that will have

reasonably wide application to Federal,

State, and local agencies. Research is

encouraged in, but not limited to, the

following areas:

Forensic Sciences. Identification and

development of evidence in DNA/
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21259

serology, finger-prints, trace evidence,

pathology, entomology, odontology,

toxicology, questioned documents, and

weapons identification.

Less-Than-Lethal Technology.

Reduction in the incidence of injuries

and death to officers and the public

during confrontations, especially those

requiring the use of force, arrest of

suspects, transport of suspects or

prisoners, pursuit of fleeing suspects on

foot or in vehicles, and control of

violent individuals or crowds in the

streets or in prisons and jails.

Enhancement of officer safety. Field

evaluations of new less-than-lethal

technology.

Science and Technology. Virtual

reality technology for officer training;

command and control operations;

providing improved courtroom security;

improving the efficiency of probation

and parole operations; identifying

concealed weapons; monitoring the

status, health, and location of officers or

prisoners; and detecting and disabling

explosives. Technology useful in the

detection and apprehension of persons

engaged in computer crime.

Drug Testing. Developing or adapting

analytic techniques for extracting drugrelated material from hair and urine and

other body fluids. Comparative

efficiencies and relative costs as well as

the utility of the testing techniques in

various criminal justice settings.

Contact

Applicants are encouraged to contact

NIJ Program Managers to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals. To

obtain specific information on the

programs described under this goal,

potential applicants may contact:

Richard M. Rau, Ph.D., (202) 307–0648,

for the Forensic Sciences Program and

the Drug Testing Program.

Raymond L. Downs, Ph.D., (202) 307–

0646, for the Less-Than-Lethal

Program and the Science and

Technology Program.

Kevin Jackson, (202) 307–2956, for the

Standards Development and Testing

Program and the Law Enforcement

Technology Centers.

DOD/DOJ Memorandum of

Understanding.

Peter Nacci, (703) 351–8608, for

information on the law enforcement

aspects of the DOJ/DOD MOU.

Dave Fields, Ph.D., (703) 696–2330, for

information on the Military

Operations Other Than War aspects of

the DOJ/DOD MOU.

General Law Enforcement Technology

Information

Marc Caplan, National Law

Enforcement and Corrections

Technology Center, (800) 248–2742, for

information on specific law enforcement

technologies that are under

development or in production,

technologies in use by law enforcement

agencies, soft-body armor and other

equipment standards, equipment testing

and results, and other such nongrantrelated questions.

Administrative Guidelines

In this section applicants will find

recommendations to grant writers,

requirements for grant recipients,

general application information, and a

reiteration of the 1995–1996 grant

application deadlines.

Application Information

Please see ‘‘Requirements for Award

Recipients’’ below for general

application and eligibility requirements

and selection criteria. Proposals not

conforming to these application

procedures will not be considered.

Award Period. NIJ limits its grants

and cooperative agreements to a

maximum period of 24 months.

Due Date. Ten (10) copies of fully

executed proposals should be sent to:

[Name and Number of Specific Goal],

National Institute of Justice, 633 Indiana

Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20531.

Completed proposals must be

received at the National Institute of

Justice by the close of business on June

17 and December 16, 1996. Extensions

of these deadlines will not be permitted.

Contact. Applicants are encouraged to

contact NIJ Program Managers in the

appropriate goal areas to discuss topic

viability, data availability, or proposal

content before submitting proposals.

Recommendations to Grant Writers

Over the past 4 years, Institute staff

have reviewed approximately 1,500

grant applications. On the basis of those

reviews and inquiries from applicants,

the Institute offers the following

recommendations to help potential

applicants present workable,

understandable proposals. Many of

these recommendations were adopted

from materials provided to NIJ by the

State Justice Institute, especially for

applicants new to NIJ. Others reflect

standard NIJ requirements.

The author(s) of the proposal should

be clearly identified. Proposals that are

incorrectly collated, incomplete, or

handwritten will be judged as submitted

or, at NIJ’s discretion, will be returned

without a deadline extension. No

additions to the original submission are

allowed. The Institute suggests that

applicants make certain that they

address the questions, issues, and

requirements set forth below when

preparing an application.

1. What is the subject or problem you

wish to address? Describe the subject or

problem and how it affects the criminal

justice system and the public. Discuss

how your approach will improve the

situation or advance the state of the art

of knowledge or state of the science and

explain why it is the most appropriate

approach to take. Give appropriate

citations to the scientific literature. The

source of statistics or research findings

cited to support a statement or position

should be included in a reference list.

2. What do you want to do? Explain

the goal(s) of the project in simple,

straightforward terms. The goals should

describe the intended consequences or

expected overall effect of the proposed

project, rather than the tasks or

activities to be conducted. To the

greatest extent possible, applicants

should avoid a specialized vocabulary

that is not readily understood by the

general public. Technical jargon does

not enhance an application.

3. How will you do it? Describe the

methodology carefully so that what you

propose to do and how you would do

it is clear. All proposed tasks should be

set forth so that a reviewer can see a

logical progression of tasks and relate

those tasks directly to the

accomplishment of the project’s goal(s).

When in doubt about whether to

provide a more detailed explanation or

to assume a particular level of

knowledge or expertise on the part of

the reviewers, err on the side of caution

and provide the additional information.

A description of project tasks also will

help identify necessary budget items.

All staff positions and project costs

should relate directly to the tasks

described. The Institute encourages

applicants to attach letters of

cooperation and support from agencies

that will be involved in or directly

affected by the proposed project.

4. What should you include in a grant

application for a program evaluation?

An evaluation should determine

whether the proposed program, training,

procedure, service, or technology

accomplished the objectives it was

designed to meet. Applicants seeking

support for a proposed evaluation

should describe the criteria that will be

used to evaluate the project’s

effectiveness and identify program

elements that will require further

modification. The description in the

application should include how the

evaluation will be conducted, when it

will occur during the project period,
21260 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

who will conduct it, and what specific

measures will be used. In most

instances, the evaluation should be

conducted by persons not connected

with the implementation of the

procedure, training, service, or

technique, or the administration of the

project.

5. How will others learn about your

findings? Include a plan to disseminate

the results of the research, evaluation,

technology, or demonstration beyond

the jurisdictions and individuals

directly affected by the project. The plan

should identify the specific methods

that will be used to inform the field

about the project such as the publication

of journal articles or the distribution of

key materials. Expectations regarding

products are discussed more fully in the

following section, ‘‘Requirements for

Award Recipients.’’ A statement that a

report or research findings ‘‘will be

made available to’’ the field is not

sufficient. The specific means of

distribution or dissemination as well as

the types of recipients should be

identified. Reproduction and

dissemination costs are allowable

budget items. Applicants must concisely

describe the interim and final products

and address each product’s purpose,

audience, and usefulness to the field.

This discussion should identify the

principal criminal justice constituency

or type of agency for which each

product is intended and describe how

the constituent group or agency would

be expected to use the product or report.

Successful proposals will clearly

identify the nature of the grant products

that can reasonably be expected if the

project is funded. In addition, a

schedule of delivery dates of all

products should be delineated.

6. What are the specific costs

involved? The budget application

should be presented clearly. Major

budget categories such as personnel,

benefits, travel, supplies, equipment,

and indirect costs should be identified

separately. The components of ‘‘Other’’

or ‘‘Miscellaneous’’ items should be

specified in the application budget

narrative and should not include setasides for undefined contingencies.

7. How much detail should be

included in the budget narrative? The

budget narrative should list all planned

expenditures and detail the salaries,

materials, and cost assumptions used to

estimate project costs. The narrative and

cost estimates should be presented

under the following standard budget

categories: personnel, fringe benefits,

travel, equipment, supplies, contracts,

other, and indirect costs. For multiyear

projects, applicants must include the

full amount of NIJ funding for the entire

life of the project. This amount should

be reflected in item 15g on Form 424

and line 6k on 424A. When appropriate,

grant applications should include

justification of consultants and a full

explanation of daily rates for any

consultants proposed. To avoid

common shortcomings of application

budget narratives, include the following

information:

Personnel estimates that accurately

provide the amount of time to be spent

by personnel involved with the project

and the total associated costs, including

current salaries for the designated

personnel (e.g., Project Director, 50

percent of 1 year’s annual salary of

$50,000 = $25,000). If salary costs are

computed using an hourly or daily rate,

the annual salary and number of hours

or days in a work year should be shown.

Estimates for supplies and expenses

supported by a complete description of

the supplies to be used, nature and

extent of printing to be done,

anticipated telephone charges, and other

common expenditures, with the basis

for computing the estimates included

(e.g., 100 reports × 75 pages each ×

$0.05/page = $375.00). Supply and

expense estimates offered simply as

‘‘based on experience’’ are not

sufficient.

8. What travel regulations apply to the

budget estimates? Transportation costs

and per diem rates must comply with

the policies of the applicant

organization, and a copy of the

applicant’s travel policy should be

submitted as an appendix to the

application. If the applicant does not

have a travel policy established in

writing, then travel rates must be

consistent with those established by the

Federal Government. The budget

narrative should state which regulations

are in force for the project and should

include the estimated fare, the number

of persons traveling, the number of trips

to be taken, and the length of stay. The

estimated costs of travel, lodging,

ground transportation, and other

subsistence should be listed separately.

When combined, the subtotals for these

categories should equal the estimate

listed on the budget form.

9. Which forms should be used? A

copy of Standard Form (SF) 424,

Application for Federal Assistance, plus

instructions, appears in the back of this

book. Please follow the instructions

carefully and include all parts and

pages. In addition to SF 424, recent

requirements involve certification

regarding (1) lobbying; (2) debarment,

suspension, and other responsibility

matters; and (3) drug-free workplace

requirements. The certification form

that is attached to SF 424 should be

signed by the appropriate official and

included in the grant application.

10. What technical materials are

required to be included in the

application?

A one-page abstract of the full

proposal, highlighting the project’s

purpose, methods, activities, and when

known, the location(s) of field research.

A program narrative, which is the

technical portion of the proposal. It

should include a clear, concise

statement of the problem, goals, and

objectives of the project and related

questions to be explored. A discussion

of the relationship of the proposed work

to the existing literature is expected.

A statement of the project’s

anticipated contribution to criminal

justice policy and practice. It is

important that applicants briefly cite

those particular issues and concerns of

present-day criminal justice policy that

stimulate the proposed line of inquiry

and suggest what their own

investigation would contribute to

current knowledge.

A detailed statement of the proposed

research or study design and analytical

methodologies. The proposed data

sources, data collection strategies,

variables and issues to be examined,

and procedures of analysis to be

employed should be delineated

carefully and completely. When

appropriate, experimental designs are

encouraged because of their potential

relevance to policymaking and the

strength of the evidence they can

produce.

The organization and management

plan to conduct the study. A list of

major milestones of events, activities,

and products and a timetable for

completion that indicates the time

commitments to individual project tasks

should be included. All grant activities,

including writing of the final report,

should be completed within the

duration of the award period.

The applicant’s curriculum vitae

should summarize education, research

experience, and bibliographic

information related to the proposed

work.

11. Use of grant funds. Grant funds

may be used to purchase or lease

equipment essential to accomplishing

the objectives of the project. The budget

narrative must list such equipment and

explain why the equipment is

necessary. Funds may not be used for

operating programs, writing texts or

handbooks, training, etc.

12. To what extent may indirect costs

be included in the budget estimates? It

is the policy of the Institute that all

costs should be budgeted directly;

however, if an applicant has an indirect
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21261

cost rate that has been approved by a

Federal agency within the past 2 years,

an indirect cost recovery estimate may

be included in the budget. A copy of the

approved rate agreement should be

submitted as an appendix to the

application. If an applicant does not

have an approved rate agreement, the

applicant should contact the Office of

the Comptroller, Office of Justice

Programs, (202) 307–0604, to obtain

information about preparing an indirect

cost rate proposal.

13. What, if any, matching funds are

required? Units of State and local

governments (not including publicly

supported institutions of higher

education) are encouraged to contribute

a match (cash, noncash, or both) of

requested funds. Other applicants also

are encouraged to seek matching

contributions from other Federal

agencies or private foundations to assist

in meeting the costs of the project.

14. Should other funding sources be

listed? Applicants are expected to

identify all other Federal, local, or

private sources of support, including

other NIJ programs, to which this or a

closely related proposal has been or will

be submitted. This information permits

NIJ to consider the joint funding

potential and limits the possibility of

inadvertent duplicate funding.

Applicants may submit more than one

proposal to NIJ, but the same proposal

cannot be submitted in more than one

program area.

15. What are the deadlines? June 15

and December 15, 1995, and June 17

and December 16, 1996.

16. Is there a page limit? The Institute

has established a limit of 30 doublespaced 12-point font pages for all

normal grant applications. This page

limit does not include references,

budget narrative, curriculum vitae, or

necessary appendices. Applications for

small grants ($1,000–$50,000) are

limited to 15 double-spaced pages.

Applicants are cautioned that obvious

attempts to stretch interpretations of

these limits will disqualify proposals

from review.

17. What is the page order? The

following order is mandatory. Omission

can result in rejection of the application:

1. SF 424.

2. Budget narrative.

3. Assurances and Certifications, etc.

4. Negotiated rate agreement.

5. Names and affiliations of all key

persons from applicant and

subcontractor(s), advisors, consultants,

and Advisory Board members. Include

the name of the Principal Investigator,

title, organizational affiliation (if any),

department (if institution of higher

education), address, phone, and fax.

6. Abstract.

7. Table of Contents.

8. Program narrative.

9. References.

10. Resume ́s of key personnel.

18. What does the review process

entail? After all applications for a

competition are received, NIJ will

convene a series of peer review panels

of criminal justice professionals and

researchers. NIJ will assign proposals to

peer panels that it deems most

appropriate. Panel members read each

proposal and meet to assess the

technical merits and policy relevance of

the proposed research. Panel

assessments of the proposals, together

with assessments by NIJ staff, are

submitted to the Director, who has sole

and final authority over approval and

awards. The review normally takes 60 to

90 days, depending on the number of

applications received. Each applicant

receives written comments from the

peer review panel concerning the

strengths and weaknesses of the

proposal. These comments may include

suggestions for how a revised or

subsequent application to NIJ might be

improved.

19. What are the criteria for an award?

The essential question asked of each

applicant is, ‘‘If this study were

successful, how would criminal justice

policies or operations be improved?’’

Four criteria are applied in the

evaluation process:

Impact of the proposed project.

Feasibility of the approach to the

issue, including technical merit and

practical considerations.

Originality of the approach, including

creativity of the proposal and capability

of the research staff.

Economy of the approach. Applicants

bear the responsibility of demonstrating

to the panel that the proposed study

addresses the critical issues of the topic

area and that the study findings could

ultimately contribute to a practical

application in law enforcement or

criminal justice. Reviewers will assess

applicants’ awareness of related

research or studies and their ability to

direct the research or study toward

answering questions of policy or

improving the state of criminal justice

operations.

Technical merit is judged by the

likelihood that the study design will

produce convincing findings. Reviewers

take into account the logic and timing

of the research or study plan, the

validity and reliability of measures

proposed, the appropriateness of

statistical methods to be used, and each

applicant’s awareness of factors that

might dilute the credibility of the

findings. Impact is judged by the scope

of the proposed approach and by the

utility of the proposed products.

Reviewers consider each applicant’s

understanding of the process of

innovation in the targeted criminal

justice agency or setting and knowledge

of prior uses of criminal justice research

by the proposed criminal justice

constituency. Appropriateness of

products in terms of proposed content

and format is also considered.

Applicants’ qualifications are

evaluated both in terms of the depth of

experience and the relevance of that

experience to the proposed research or

study. Costs are evaluated in terms of

the reasonableness of each item and the

utility of the project to the Institute’s

program.

20. Are there any other considerations

in selecting applications for an award?

Projects should have a national impact

or have potential relevance to a number

of jurisdictions. Because of the broad

national mandate of the National

Institute of Justice, projects that address

the unique concerns of a single

jurisdiction should be fully justified.

Projects that intend to provide services

in addition to performing research are

eligible for support, but only for the

resources necessary to conduct the

research tasks outlined in the proposal.

The applicant’s performance on

previous or current NIJ grants will also

be taken into consideration in making

funding decisions.

21. Who is eligible to apply? NIJ

awards grants to, or enters into

cooperative agreements with,

educational institutions, nonprofit

organizations, public agencies,

individuals, and profitmaking

organizations that are willing to waive

their fees. Where appropriate, special

eligibility criteria are indicated in the

separate solicitations.

22. Does NIJ accept resubmission of

proposals? The Institute will accept

resubmission of a previously submitted

proposal. The applicant should indicate

for Question 8, Form 424, that the

application is a revision. The applicant

should include this information in the

abstract. Finally, the applicant should

prepare a one-page response to the

earlier panel review (to follow the

abstract) including (1) the title,

submission date, and NIJ-assigned

application number of the previous

proposal and (2) a brief summary of

responses to the review and/or revisions

to the proposal.

NIJ Policy Regarding Unsolicited

Proposals

It is NIJ’s policy to submit all

unsolicited proposals to peer review.

NIJ’s peer review process takes place in
21262 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

periodic cycles; unsolicited proposals

received will be included in the next

available review cycle. NIJ will offer the

applicant the option of revising the

proposal in accordance with the

program goals established in the Plan or,

alternatively, submitting the original

proposal to the peer panel it deems most

appropriate.

Requirements for Award Recipients

Required Products

Each project is expected to generate

tangible products of maximum benefit

to criminal justice professionals,

researchers, and policymakers. In

particular, NIJ strongly encourages

documents that provide information of

practical utility to law enforcement

officials; prosecutors; judges;

corrections officers; victims services

providers; and Federal, State, county,

and local elected officials. Products

should include:

A summary of approximately 2,500

words highlighting the findings of the

research and the policy issues those

findings will inform. The material

should be written in a style that will be

accessible to policy officials and

practitioners and suitable for possible

publication as an NIJ Research in Brief.

An NIJ editorial style guide is sent to

each project director at the time of the

award.

A full technical report, including a

discussion of the research question,

review of the literature, description of

project methodology, detailed review of

project findings, and conclusions and

policy recommendations.

Clean copies of all automated data

sets developed during the research and

full documentation prepared in

accordance with the instructions in the

NIJ Data Resources Manual.

Brief project summaries for NIJ use in

preparing annual reports to the

President and the Congress. As

appropriate, additional products such as

case studies and interim and final

reports (e.g., articles, manuals, or

training materials) may be specified in

the proposal or negotiated at the time of

the award.

Public Release of Automated Data Sets

NIJ is committed to ensuring the

public availability of research data and

to this end established its Data

Resources Program in 1984. All NIJ

award recipients who collect data are

required to submit a machine-readable

copy of the data and appropriate

documentation to NIJ prior to the

conclusion of the project. The data and

materials are reviewed for

completeness. NIJ staff then create

machine-readable data sets, prepare

users’ guides, and distribute data and

documentation to other researchers in

the field. A variety of formats are

acceptable; however, the data and

materials must conform with

requirements detailed in Depositing

Data With the Data Resources Program

of the National Institute of Justice: A

Handbook. A copy of this handbook is

sent to each project director at the time

of the award. For further information

about NIJ’s Data Resources Program,

contact Dr. Pamela Lattimore, (202)

307–2961.

Standards of Performance by Recipients

NIJ expects individuals and

institutions receiving its support to

work diligently and professionally

toward completing a high-quality

research or study product. Besides this

general expectation, the Institute

imposes specific requirements to ensure

that proper financial and administrative

controls are applied to the project.

Financial and general reporting

requirements are detailed in Financial

and Administrative Guide for Grants, a

publication of the Office of Justice

Programs. This guideline manual is sent

to recipient institutions with the award

documents. Project directors and

recipient financial administrators

should pay particular attention to the

regulations in this document.

Program Monitoring

Award recipients and Principal

Investigators assume certain

responsibilities as part of their

participation in government-sponsored

research and evaluation. NIJ’s

monitoring activities are intended to

help grantees meet these

responsibilities. They are based on good

communication and open dialogue, with

collegiality and mutual respect. Some of

the elements of this dialogue are:

Communication with NIJ in the early

stages of the grant, as the elements of

the proposal’s design and methodology

are developed and operationalized.

Timely communication with NIJ

regarding any developments that might

affect the project’s compliance with the

schedules, milestones, and products set

forth in the proposal. (See statement on

Timeliness, below).

Communication with other NIJ

grantees conducting related research

projects. An annual ‘‘cluster

conference’’ should be anticipated and

should be budgeted for by applicants at

a cost of $1,000 for each year of the

grant.

Providing NIJ on request with brief

descriptions of the project in interim

stages at such time as the Institute may

need this information to meet its

reporting requirements to the Congress.

NIJ will give as much advance

notification of these requests as

possible, but will expect a timely

response from grantees when requests

are made. NIJ is prepared to receive

such communication through electronic

media.

Providing NIJ with copies of

presentations made at conferences,

meetings, and elsewhere based in whole

or in part on the work of the project.

Providing NIJ with prepublication

copies of articles based on the project

appearing in professional journals or the

media, either during the life of the grant

or after.

Other reporting requirements

(Progress Reports, Final Reports, and

other grant products) are spelled out

elsewhere in this section of the Research

Plan. Financial reporting requirements

will be described in the grant award

documents received by successful

applicants.

Communications

NIJ Program Managers should be kept

informed of research progress. Written

progress reports are required on a

quarterly basis. All awards use standard

quarterly reporting periods (January 1

through March 31, April 1 through June

30, and so forth) regardless of the

project’s start date. Progress reports will

inform the monitor which tasks have

been completed and whether significant

delays or departures from the original

workplan are expected.

Timeliness

Grantees are expected to complete

award products within the timeframes

that have been agreed upon by NIJ and

the grantee. The Institute recognizes that

there are legitimate reasons for project

extensions. However, NIJ does not

consider the assumption of additional

research projects that impinge upon

previous time commitments as

legitimate reasons for delay. Projects

with unreasonable delays can be

terminated administratively. In this

situation, any funds remaining are

withdrawn. Future applications from

either the project director or the

recipient institution are subject to strict

scrutiny and may be denied support

based on past failure to meet minimum

standards.

Publications

The Institute encourages grantees to

prepare their work for NIJ publication.

In cases where grantees disseminate

their findings through a variety of

media, such as professional journals,

books, and conferences, copies of such
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21263

publications should be sent to the

Program Manager as they become

available, even if they appear well after

a project’s expiration. NIJ imposes no

restriction on such publications other

than the following acknowledgment and

disclaimer: This research was supported

by grant number llllllll from

the National Institute of Justice. Points

of view are those of the author(s) and do

not necessarily represent the position of

the U.S. Department of Justice.

Data Confidentiality and Human

Subjects Protection

Research that examines individual

traits and experiences plays a vital part

in expanding our knowledge about

criminal behavior. It is essential,

however, that researchers protect

subjects from needless risk of harm or

embarrassment and proceed with their

willing and informed cooperation. NIJ

requires that investigators protect

information identifiable to research

participants. When information is

safeguarded, it is protected by statute

from being used in legal proceedings:

‘‘[S]uch 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’’ (42 United States Code

3789g).

Applicants should file their plans to

protect sensitive information as part of

their proposal. Necessary safeguards are

detailed in 28 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR), Part 22. A short

‘‘how-to’’ guideline for developing a

privacy and confidentiality plan can be

obtained from NIJ program managers.

In addition, the U.S. Department of

Justice has adopted Human Subjects

policies similar to those established by

the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. In general, these

policies exempt most NIJ-supported

research from Institutional Review

Board (IRB) review. However, the

Institute may find in certain instances

that subjects or subject matters may

require IRB review. These exceptions

will be decided on an individual basis

during application review. Researchers

are encouraged to review 28 CFR Part

46.101 to determine their individual

project requirements.

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

Comprehensive Program Plan for Fiscal

Year 1996 OJJDP Program Objectives

The Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) seeks

to focus its assistance on the

development and implementation of

programs with the greatest potential for

reducing juvenile delinquency and

improving the juvenile justice system by

establishing partnerships with State,

Native American, Native Alaskan, and

local governments and public and

private organizations. To that end,

OJJDP has set three goals that constitute

the major elements of a sound policy for

juvenile justice and delinquency

prevention:

• To promote delinquency prevention

and early intervention efforts that

reduce the flow of juvenile offenders

into the juvenile justice system, the

numbers of serious and violent

offenders, and the development of

chronic delinquent careers.

• To improve the juvenile justice

system and the response of the system

to juvenile delinquents, status offenders,

and dependent, neglected, and abused

children.

• To preserve the public safety in a

manner that serves the appropriate

development and best use of secure

detention and corrections options, while

at the same time fostering the use of

community-based programs for juvenile

offenders.

Underlying each of the three goals is

the overarching premise that

achievement of these goals is vital to

protecting the long-term safety of the

public from increased juvenile

delinquency and violence. In pursuing

these goals, we divide our programs into

the key categories you will find in the

program plan: public safety and law

enforcement; strengthening the juvenile

justice system; delinquency prevention

and intervention; and child abuse,

neglect, and dependency proceedings.

The following discussion, however,

addresses the broader goals of OJJDP.

Delinquency Prevention and Early

Intervention

A primary goal of OJJDP is to identify

and promote programs that prevent or

reduce the occurrence of juvenile

offenses, both criminal and noncriminal, and to intervene immediately

and effectively when delinquent or

status offense conduct first occurs. A

sound policy for juvenile delinquency

prevention seeks to strengthen the most

powerful contributing factor to socially

acceptable behavior—a productive place

for young people in a law-abiding

society.

Delinquency prevention programs can

operate on a broad scale, providing for

positive youth development, or can

target juveniles identified as being at

high risk for delinquency, with

programs designed to reduce future

juvenile offending. OJJDP prevention

programs take a risk-focused

delinquency prevention approach based

on public health and social

development models.

Early interventions are designed to

provide services to juveniles whose

non-criminal misbehavior indicates that

they are on a delinquent pathway, or for

first time non-violent delinquent

offenders or non-serious repeat

offenders who do not respond to initial

system intervention. These

interventions are generally non-punitive

but serve to hold a juvenile accountable

while providing services tailored to the

individual needs of the juvenile and the

juvenile’s family. They are designed to

both deter future misconduct and

ameliorate risk or enhance protective

factors.

Improvement of the Juvenile Justice

System

A second goal of OJJDP is to promote

improvements in the juvenile justice

system and facilitate the most effective

allocation of system resources. This goal

is necessary for holding juveniles who

commit crimes accountable for their

conduct, particularly serious and

violent offenders who sometimes slip

through the cracks of the system or are

inappropriately diverted. This includes

assisting law enforcement officers in

their efforts to prevent and control

delinquency and the victimization of

children through community policing

programs and coordination and

collaboration with other system

components and with child caring

systems. It involves helping juvenile

and family courts, and the prosecutors

and public defenders who practice in

those courts, to provide a system of

justice that maintains due process

protections. It requires trying innovative

programs and carefully evaluating those

programs to determine what works and

what does not work. It includes a

commitment to involving crime victims

in the juvenile justice system and

ensuring that their rights are considered.

In this regard, OJJDP will continue to

work closely with the Office for Victims

of Crime to further cooperative

programming, including the provision

of services to juveniles who are crime

victims or when the provision of victims

services improves the operation of the

juvenile justice system. Improving the

juvenile justice system also calls for

building an appropriate juvenile

detention and corrections capacity and

for intensified efforts to use juvenile

detention and correctional facilities

when necessary and under conditions

that maximize public safety, while

providing effective rehabilitation
21264 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

services. It requires encouraging states

to carefully consider the use of

expanded transfer authority that sends

the most serious, violent, and

intractable juvenile offenders to the

criminal justice system, while

preserving individualized justice. It

necessitates conducting research and

gathering statistical information in order

to understand how the juvenile justice

system works in serving children and

families. And finally, the system can

only be improved if information and

knowledge is communicated,

understood, and applied for the purpose

of juvenile justice system improvement.

Corrections, Detention and CommunityBased Alternatives

A third OJJDP goal is to maintain the

public safety through a balanced use of

secure detention and corrections, and

community-based alternatives. This

involves identifying and promoting

effective community-based programs

and services for juveniles who have

formal contact with the juvenile justice

system, and emphasizing options that

maintain the safety of the public, are

appropriately restrictive, and promote

and preserve positive ties with the

child’s family, school, and community.

Communities cannot afford to place

responsibility for juvenile delinquency

entirely on publicly operated juvenile

justice system programs. A sound policy

for combating juvenile delinquency and

reducing the threat of youth violence

makes maximum use of a full range of

public and private programs and

services, most of which operate in the

juvenile’s home community, including

those provided by the health and mental

health, child welfare, social service, and

educational systems.

Coordination of the development of

community-based programs and

services with the development and use

of a secure detention and correctional

system capability for those juveniles

who require a secure option is cost

effective, will protect the public, reduce

facility crowding, and result in better

services for both institutionalized

juveniles and those who can be served

while remaining in their community

environment.

Summary of Public Comments on the

Proposed Comprehensive Plan for Fiscal

Year 1996

OJJDP published its Proposed

Comprehensive Plan for Fiscal Year

(FY) 1996 in the Federal Register (Vol.

61, No. 34) on February 20, 1996, for a

45-day public comment period. OJJDP

received 46 letters commenting on the

proposed plan. All comments have been

considered in the development of the

Final Comprehensive Plan for FY 1996.

The majority of the letters provided

positive comments about the overall

plan and its programs. The following is

a summary of the substantive comments

received and OJJDP’s responses to the

comments. Unless otherwise indicated,

each comment was made by a single

respondent.

Comment: Seven respondents

expressed strong support for the overall

plan. One writer asserted that data

projections for juvenile crime for the

next 15 years make a compelling case

for full funding of all OJJDP programs.

Another commended OJJDP for the

broad-based and forward-thinking

programming in the plan. A third

comment indicated that the proposed

programs will strengthen law

enforcement prevention efforts and have

an impact on juvenile crime. One

respondent highly endorsed the existing

OJJDP program and the proposed plan

but also recommended that funds be

earmarked for imaginative, innovative,

and creative programs with

imagineering concepts to maximize

program benefits. One comment

described the plan as a comprehensive,

balanced approach to juvenile

delinquency and delinquency

prevention. Another supported OJJDP’s

purpose to provide a comprehensive,

coordinated approach to prevent and

control juvenile crime and improve the

juvenile justice system. The final

comment called OJJDP’s priorities

essential for addressing the increasing

complexity of issues facing the juvenile

justice system.

Response: OJJDP appreciates the

support expressed by these and other

respondents.

Comment: Five letters contained

criticism of the overall plan. Three of

these cited the lack of specific funding

information as a major flaw. One of

those letters also noted that the majority

of funding is already committed, mostly

to long-time recipients, and that the

plan contains a large number of social

service programs with no proven

effectiveness in reducing or preventing

delinquency. This writer recommended

eliminating or reducing 10 programs

and suggested that OJJDP reissue the

plan to solicit a program to develop a

comprehensive drug prevention

curriculum for students. Another

respondent also expressed concern

about the large number of initiatives and

activities with predetermined

recipients. Citing the JJDP Act

competition requirement (Section

262(d)(1)(B)), the writer asked about

criteria for waiving the competitive

process. One respondent found that the

plan was not sufficiently comprehensive

and called for programs to teach correct

principles and moral responsibility,

particularly in the family unit and in the

schools.

Response: Proposed funding levels

were not included in the plan due to the

uncertainty of FY 1996 appropriations.

The proposed plan was premised on FY

1996 funding being at or near FY 1995

levels. Continuation commitments,

coupled with a variety of proven or

ongoing projects, many of which are

technical assistance and training

initiatives that have a national impact

and level funding, preclude wholesale

funding of new programs in FY 1996.

All new programs will be competitively

funded with no waivers of the

competition requirement contemplated.

Comment: One comment on the

discretionary grant continuation policy

suggested that OJJDP should emphasize

funding innovative programs along with

the continuation of programs. The

writer noted that each year it appears

that limited funds are available for new

programs.

Response: The plan includes several

new and innovative programs coupled

with a focus on program evaluation.

Innovative research and evaluation

programs will be eligible to compete

under an expanded field-initiated

research program in FY 1996.

Comment: A Native American

respondent stated that the plan should

specifically name Indian Nations as

partners.

Response: The cited language in the

plan is amended to read: ‘‘establishing

partnerships with State, Native

American, Native Alaskan, and local

governments and public and private

organizations.’’

Comment: OJJDP received three

comments on the goals listed in the

plan. One respondent suggested that the

first goal could be strengthened by

calling specifically for better character

development in the home and in

schools. The writer stated that the

second goal does not convey the idea

that the primary effort should be

character corrections, in the corrections

system, to shrink the number of

offenders. The second respondent

expressed support for the three goals

and described how the Judicial Branch

of the Navajo Nation is working toward

those same goals, with early

intervention being of particular

importance. The third letter expressed

support for the goals and indicated that

their achievement is vital to public

safety.

Response: Both prevention and

treatment programs seek to improve

character and instill positive values in
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21265

juveniles. OJJDP has long supported

family strengthening programs, many of

which feature character development

objectives.

Comment: Six respondents

commented on the field-initiated

research program. All were generally

supportive, and five made substantive

comments. One suggested specific

topics: measuring effectiveness of

intervention with young prostitutes;

drug treatment approaches, educational/

literacy project effectiveness; and what

works with the multiproblem young

criminal. One respondent, noting the

call for improving data collaboration

efforts, suggested that a portion of the

research be applied to projects that

would seek to standardize court reports,

thus increasing the juvenile justice

system’s ability to access and share

appropriate information with child

protective services and mental health

agencies. Another writer who supported

the research initiative expressed interest

in two priority research topics: (1) youth

gangs in residential facilities and (2)

mental health issues, with emphasis on

eliminating posttraumatic stress

disorder in youthful offenders and

breaking the cycle of violence. One

respondent was pleased with the

program but expressed concern that the

priority areas did not specifically

include adolescent sexual offenders. A

Native American respondent pointed

out several research needs in the Native

American community, including

technical assistance and program

support to acquire a workable data base,

share information, and analyze that

information for policy development and

planning. This respondent suggested

that OJJDP should directly fund or

devote staff or contract expertise to

relevant studies and should encourage

its staff and consultants to network with

Indian Nation programs to undertake

the studies that policy development

requires.

Response: While the plan suggests

priority research topics, OJJDP will take

into careful consideration each of the

topics suggested by these respondents.

The adolescent sex offender is a topic of

particular interest to OJJDP. Several

OJJDP studies related to the juvenile

sexual offender are nearing completion,

and it is anticipated that study findings

will suggest future research directions.

While Native American research needs

have not been specifically mentioned,

OJJDP welcomes applications from the

Native American community that

identify these needs and propose

studies that will meet them. OJJDP is

also working closely with the Native

American desk within the Office of

Justice Programs to obtain feedback on

its Native American programs,

including the new 1996 Native

American training and technical

assistance program.

Comment: In a comment related to the

national juvenile court data archives, a

respondent suggested that funds be set

aside for States to develop statewide

juvenile information systems and to

explore issues such as minority

overrepresentation, use of legal counsel,

and gender implications.

Response: OJJDP obtains invaluable

information from State information

systems. Such systems are used to

analyze both juvenile court and juvenile

corrections activity. The Office

understands that the development and

maintenance of such systems are

expensive and time consuming. Many

States do not have the resources

available to fully implement

information systems that can contribute

to a national information system. In the

past, the Office has supported the

development and improvement of State

systems through programs such as the

National Juvenile Court Data Archive

and the Juveniles Taken Into Custody

program. Each includes a technical

assistance component that aids States in

determining appropriate information

systems and information collection

methods.

The Office recognizes the need for

further development of State

information systems. Areas other than

corrections and courts also require

attention. OJJDP will examine more

carefully the role of the Office through

the development of a long-term

information systems development plan.

This plan will examine national

information needs and make specific

recommendations for meeting these

needs. As part of this plan, OJJDP will

examine what assistance can be

provided to the States as they develop

and refine their information systems

and how these systems can also help to

meet overarching national information

needs.

Comment: One respondent objected to

funding the National Conference of

State Legislatures, suggesting that OJJDP

promote State Agencies as the

appropriate entities to provide technical

assistance to State legislatures.

Response: In funding the National

Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)

in FY 1995, OJJDP concluded that the

organization was uniquely qualified to

provide pertinent and timely

information to State legislators and their

staff. NCSL looks to traditional Federal,

State, and local juvenile justice agencies

for information, packaging the data to

meet the specific needs of State

lawmakers. In addition, as a

membership organization, NCSL has a

number of information tools, such as

professional publications and

conferences, designed to reach State

legislators.

Comment: One comment addressed

telecommunications assistance, noting

the very positive response in the

writer’s State to OJJDP’s teleconference

series. The respondent made two

suggestions: (1) Provide special

allocations to States to facilitate

downlinking of teleconferences and (2)

focus more on the use of new

technology such as the interactive video

disc (IVD).

Response: OJJDP appreciates hearing

of the value of its satellite

teleconference series. In the coming

year, OJJDP and its telecommunications

grantee, Eastern Kentucky University

(EKU), will explore the use of other

technologies, including IVD, for

information dissemination and training

purposes. To date, OJJDP has not been

apprised of problems viewers may have

had in affording or accessing downlink

sites. In fact, EKU has acted as

coordinator to help interested

individuals and organizations locate

sites in the community and to join

groups of persons living in their same

geographical area to sponsor and attend

teleconferences.

Comment: A respondent called for

more emphasis on private sector

involvement and media support in the

area of public safety and law

enforcement.

Response: Combating Violence and

Delinquency: The National Juvenile

Justice Action Plan, recently released by

the Coordinating Council on Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention, has

as one of its eight primary objectives to

reduce youth violence: ‘‘Implement an

aggressive public outreach campaign on

effective strategies to combat youth

violence.’’ The Coordinating Council is

chaired by the Attorney General, cochaired by the Administrator of OJJDP,

and includes nine Federal agency and

nine practitioner members. The Council

developed the Action Plan as a rallying

point to mobilize individuals and

organizations across the country toward

eight objectives that, together, provide a

comprehensive—tough but smart—

response to the crisis of youth violence

and victimization. The role of the

private sector and the media in

implementing the Action Plan will be

critical in its success.

Comment: OJJDP received four

comments strongly supporting the Kids

and Guns initiative. One recommended

that OJJDP should clarify the proposed

plan to allow State agencies to apply if

they can demonstrate that the proposed
21266 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

program would be community-based.

One respondent urged substantial

funding for competitive,

comprehensive, communitywide

demonstration projects that focus on the

reduction and prevention of gun

violence. Another comment praised the

support for linkages between

community and law enforcement

responses to youth gun violence. A

fourth respondent suggested that gun

violence prevention programs must take

into account public safety and

perception and cause students to take

responsibility for their actions and the

actions of their peers while at the same

time working with the community to

ensure the healthy development of each

child. The writer also stressed that

youth gun violence reduction programs

must be tailored to the needs of each

community.

Response: The final Kids and Guns

initiative program description

incorporates each of these comments.

The solicitation will allow State

agencies to apply if they can

demonstrate strong existing linkages to

a community-based organization and if

the proposed programs will be

community-based.

Comment: Two respondents urged

that recipients of OJJDP funds should be

required to have ‘‘zero tolerance’’ for

street gangs, charging that present

policies appear to facilitate or foster the

gang problem in some cases where

funding has put active gang members on

the Federal payroll.

Response: OJJDP’s policy supports the

elimination of crime and violence by

criminal street gangs and would,

therefore, not provide funding to any

recipient that does not attempt to

intervene with such gangs and their

activities in such a way as to achieve

this policy objective. OJJDP believes that

the elimination of crime and violence

can best be achieved through the

mobilization of communities to prevent

the formation of gangs and through

collaboration between all elements of

the system to eliminate gang crime and

violence through intervention and

suppression. OJJDP’s program model

does not legitimize criminal street gang

membership or condone gang

membership by youth.

Comment: OJJDP received four letters

in support of community assessment

centers. One respondent praised the

centers as a valuable tool to service the

front end of the juvenile justice system

and raised four specific issues for

consideration in competitive

solicitations: replication (funding for

new assessment centers), expansion

(funding for existing centers to expand

into areas not presently covered),

technical assistance for communities

that want to develop a community

assessment center, and research/

evaluation (funding for a research effort

to study the effectiveness of assessment

centers and answer policy questions

raised in OJJDP’s concept paper on

assessment centers). Another writer

called the development of one-stop,

community-based intake, assessment,

and case referral centers a step in the

right direction. A third respondent

described a proposed center that would

eventually result in the creation of

alternatives to detention and enhanced

ability to put together a graduated

sanctions approach. The fourth

respondent called community

assessment centers an additional option

for the juvenile court system in

sentencing adolescents and stated that

the centers could provide short-term

diagnostic residential placement and

allow school systems to avoid the

expense of long-term out-of-district

placement.

Response: OJJDP agrees that

community assessment centers are a

promising approach to improving the

multisystem responses to all types of

youth at risk and delinquent youth.

Community assessment centers can help

communities in providing better

assessments of a child’s needs,

designing a potentially more effective

treatment plan, and creating a

centralized location for information

related to the child and the intended

intervention, fostering a more effective

and efficient case management service

system.

As indicated in the proposed plan, an

initial fact-finding phase is currently

underway, including assessment center

site visits in order to identify variations

in the assessment center approach and

to better understand the needs of the

juvenile justice system in this area.

Although a specific determination with

regard to the elements of a program

model has not yet been made, OJJDP

plans to issue an assessment center

solicitation within a short period of

time. It is too early to say whether

postadjudication diagnostic placements

or school alternatives to out-of-district

placements would be viable elements of

an assessment center model.

Comment: Two writers commented in

the area of training and technical

assistance programs. One respondent

suggested that OJJDP include funds and

technical assistance to nontechnical

staff who support very difficult youth

and families and that these funds be

available directly to grantees through

the grant application process so they

may seek help from within their local

communities. Another writer referred to

a growing need for training in cultural

differences for law enforcement and

juvenile justice practitioners.

Response: OJJDP agrees that training

and technical assistance provided from

a national level cannot fully meet the

full spectrum of local needs. Funds are

also provided to support training and

technical assistance through the

Formula Grants Program administered

by States. Comprehensive State plans

are required to support the development

of an adequate research, training, and

evaluation capacity. Further, 2 percent

of Part B funds are set aside for

technical assistance, most of which is

delivered at the local level.

OJJDP agrees that there are training

needs in cultural diversity. The Office

has supported the development and

nationwide implementation of a training

of trainers curriculum in this area.

Comment: OJJDP received 10

comments concerning gender-specific

programming for female juvenile

offenders. Nine comments supported

second-year funding for a Cook County,

Illinois, program for female juvenile

offenders. The 10th respondent

requested information about possible

funding for a program to promote selfesteem and offer alternatives to gangs to

teenage girls in lower income areas.

Response: OJJDP provided a grant in

FY 1995 to the Cook County Temporary

Juvenile Detention Center for a 1-year

developmental project under a

competitive grant program. There was

no commitment for subsequent year

funding. OJJDP has also funded the

PACE Center for Girls, which operates

in seven sites throughout the State of

Florida. PACE offers a continuum of

services that are specially designed to

meet the needs of at-risk teenage girls.

In addition, OJJDP has targeted

significant resources over the next 5

years to programs for at-risk girls and

female juvenile offenders through

funding of six sites under the

SafeFutures Program.

There is no program funded to

specifically promote self-esteem in girls

from lower income areas. As noted

above, OJJDP is funding the PACE

Center for girls, which provides teenage

girls, including those from lower

income areas with both academic

education courses and self-esteem

programs.

In FY 1996, OJJDP will competitively

fund a training and technical assistance

program to help communities provide

improved gender-specific services for atrisk and delinquent girls. OJJDP believes

that this approach will take the lessons

learned from prior funding and existing

research and produce a national impact
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21267

that continuation funding of a single

project could not achieve.

Comment: OJJDP received four

comments on the proposed Native

American technical assistance program.

One writer recommended that OJJDP

focus the expertise requirements of the

solicitation on Indian juvenile justice

and make the selection process for the

technical assistance provider

competitive. Another respondent stated

that OJJDP should fund National Indian

Justice Center training programs,

pointing out that Indian students need

tuition, travel, and lodging funds for

these programs. The third respondent

identified the need for trained workers

for family building and for

reestablishment of youth groups. The

fourth writer expressed interest in

technical assistance to replicate

successful efforts by Native American

tribes.

Response: OJJDP’s solicitation for a

technical assistance provider for Native

American programs is focused on

juvenile justice system theory, practice,

and law in the context of Native

American culture, traditions, and tribal

law. The Native American technical

assistance program will be awarded

through a competitive selection process.

OJJDP is aware of the work of the

National Indian Justice Center, the

technical assistance provider for OJJDP’s

Native American Community-Based

Alternatives Program. OJJDP encourages

the National Indian Justice Center and

other Native American service providers

to apply for funding under the Native

American technical assistance program.

The solicitation to be issued by OJJDP

for the technical assistance provider for

the Native American community will

include the transfer of knowledge and

technologies that have proven

successful in Native American

communities.

Comment: One commenter expressed

the hope that the James E. Gould

Memorial Program was not a

duplication of the American

Correctional Association’s Accreditation

of Correctional Officers, Caseworkers

and Detention Staff Program.

Response: The James E. Gould

Memorial Program is a competitive

assistance award to provide technical

assistance to juvenile correctional and

detention facilities. Under the grant, the

American Correctional Association

(ACA) provides technical assistance and

training on myriad issues for juvenile

correctional and detention facilities.

The accreditation program of the ACA is

an entirely different, independent effort

that is not funded by OJJDP.

Comment: One respondent questioned

whether a greater emphasis on transfer

of juveniles to criminal court represents

an improvement to the juvenile justice

system, suggesting that transfer

deemphasizes the juvenile justice

system and amounts to an abandonment

of individualized justice. The writer

indicated that rates of serious and

violent juvenile crime have increased

with the greater use of transfers in some

areas. OJJDP was urged to place more

emphasis on innovative approaches to

serious and violent juvenile offenders,

such as the New Mexico plan, the

blended jurisdiction approach of

Minnesota, and the serious juvenile

offender statute as developed and

implemented in Virginia.

Response: OJJDP is committed to both

protecting the public and separating

certain serious, violent, and chronic

juvenile offenders from those juveniles

who can benefit from treatment and

rehabilitation resources and programs

that are available in the juvenile justice

system. Transfer to the criminal court of

those targeted juvenile offenders who

have demonstrated through their

behavior that they do not belong in the

juvenile justice system (nature of

offense or nonamenability to juvenile

justice treatment) enables the juvenile

justice system to focus its efforts and

resources on the much larger group of

high-risk juveniles, first-time less

serious and violent or repeat offenders

who can benefit from a wide range of

effective intervention strategies. The

Coordinating Council’s National

Juvenile Justice Action Plan supports

individualized case reviews and

proposes a two-tier system of extended

jurisdiction in the juvenile court for

serious, violent, and chronic juvenile

offenders and consideration of

innovative blended sentencing options

for juvenile offenders under criminal

court jurisdiction. This system would

permit the transfer of some juvenile

offenders, taking into account age,

presenting offense, and offense history,

and allow greater prosecutorial

discretion for the older, more serious,

and violent juvenile offender.

Comment: One writer stated that

training for juvenile court judges under

the current plan is commendable and

needed but recommended that training

focus more on the core requirements of

the JJDP Act and issues surrounding

State compliance.

Response: The judicial training

program funded by OJJDP to the

National Council of Juvenile and Family

Court Judges (NCJFCJ) has addressed, to

a major degree in past years, the core

requirements of the Act and other

related topics in comprehensive

curriculums for juvenile and family

court judges, probation officers, and

others working in juvenile

courtservices. However, OJJDP will

consult with the NCJFCJ to determine

whether the issues surrounding State

compliance need to be reassessed in an

upcoming training needs assessment.

Comment: A respondent suggested

modified language to describe the

Juvenile Justice Prosecution Unit.

Response: OJJDP accepts the

recommended changes but notes that

they do not materially revise the

original project description.

Comment: Two respondents

supported funding for the Sauk Centre

Correctional Facility.

Response: OJJDP appreciates the

letters of support for the Sauk Centre

Correctional Facility in Minnesota. In

1994, the Centre was selected as one of

three sites in the Nation to participate

in the OJJDP-sponsored Correctional

Education program. The Centre has

participated in OJJDP-sponsored

training and technical assistance and

has developed plans for making

education and learning a major

component of its treatment program.

The entire staff at the facility will be

trained to use interactive teaching

methods to work with the youth.

Comment: One respondent strongly

suggested that OJJDP add a component

that would research and recommend

solutions to the nationwide critical

shortage of secure juvenile housing

space.

Response: OJJDP conducts the

biennial Census of Public and Private

Juvenile Detention, Correctional, and

Shelter Facilities. This census collects

information on the capacity of each

facility, the number of juveniles housed

there, and the security level of the

facility. The information permits

analysis of population levels compared

to capacity. By computing populationto-capacity ratios, the Office can provide

a greater understanding of crowding in

all types of juvenile facilities. OJJDP is

examining its data collection and

reporting with regard to juvenile

custody. As part of these developments,

OJJDP will consider various measures of

crowding. In the context of OJJDP’s

overall statistics development, the

Office will also examine how best to

disseminate information and research

on capacity issues for both secure and

nonsecure facilities. Issues around

solutions to the problem of crowding

will be considered in these activities.

Comment: One respondent asked that

OJJDP include comprehensive day

programs for adolescents and young

adults with the dual classification of

developmental disability and sexual

offender/reactor. The writer pointed out

that a structured day program can be an
21268 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

extremely cost-effective alternative to

residential treatment with outcomes of

reintegration into the community, as

opposed to isolation from the

community.

Response: OJJDP agrees with the

commentator about the importance of

day programs. OJJDP is supporting

replication of the Bethesda Day

Treatment program in 10 sites in FY

1996, including the six SafeFutures

sites. Bethesda Day is an intensive

program that involves an alternative

school and afterschool programs for

high-risk and delinquent youth. A

careful assessment process and a

comprehensive case management

system, in addition to extensive family

involvement, make this a very

successful model program. OJJDP will

explore with Bethesda Day Treatment

the application of the model to the dualclassification juvenile. In addition, each

SafeFutures site has mental health

service funds that can be used for this

purpose.

Comment: Two respondents indicated

a need to address the impact of

mandatory provisions related to juvenile

incarceration, such as limitations on

holding time and the prohibition against

juvenile and adult facilities being run by

one person. One of the comments

indicated that the mandatory provisions

related to time, staff, and facility site

and sound are sometimes unrealistic.

Response: The core requirements of

OJJDP’s Part B Formula Grants Program

are under continuing review and

evaluation to determine their efficacy

and impact. OJJDP will continue to

work with State and local governments

to insure that these requirements work

to protect juvenile offenders while

continuing to provide law enforcement

and human service agencies with

sufficient flexibility.

Comment: One comment expressed

interest in funding assistance for two

alternative programs: Teen Court and

House Arrest.

Response: OJJDP recognizes that teen

court programs serve multiple purposes

in helping to address problem behavior

when youth are charged with alcohol

use and other misdemeanor offenses.

Teen courts are seen as an effective

intervention in many jurisdictions

where enforcement of such offenses is

considered difficult or a low priority.

Teen courts are included in OJJDP’s

Guide for Implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders

as a graduated sanction for jurisdictions

to use in helping to send the message to

youth that the community does not

condone law-breaking behaviors. OJJDP

views the teen court program as an

excellent vehicle to help youth realize

that they are accountable for their

actions; to educate them on the impact

of their actions, either positive or

negative, on others in the community;

and to offer a hands-on juvenile justice

system experience for both the youthful

offender and youth who volunteer for

the program. To provide assistance to

jurisdictions interested in establishing

or enhancing a teen court program as an

alternative response to juvenile crime,

OJJDP has collaborated with the

Department of Transportation on the

soon-to-be-released publication entitled

Peer Justice and Youth Empowerment:

An Implementation Guide for Teen

Court Programs.

OJJDP is committed to enhancing

services for those juveniles who can

benefit from treatment and

rehabilitation in the juvenile justice

system as well as protecting the public.

One of the most recent and popular

innovations has been the use of

electronic monitoring, which provides

an effective tool for the supervision of

selected pre- and postadjudicated

offender populations who remain in the

community. OJJDP currently has an

initiative to develop a set of guidelines

and research protocols to assist juvenile

justice program administrators and

policymakers in the self-evaluation of

their electronic monitoring programs.

Comment: OJJDP received four

comments that supported the

importance of delinquency prevention

and early intervention, one writer

calling it the most cost-effective means

of dealing with future delinquency. One

of the respondents also suggested that

early intervention efforts might be

strengthened by calling specifically for

better character development in the

home and in the schools. Another writer

indicated that it is essential for OJJDP to

maintain a holistic approach and

continue to emphasize healthy youth

development through prevention and

remediation. The fourth comment

expressed approval of the recognition of

prosecutors as an integral part of

prevention programming.

Response: OJJDP agrees with the

suggestion that delinquency prevention

and early intervention are critical

components of a continuum-of-care

system. Delinquency prevention and

early intervention are key components

of OJJDP’s Comprehensive Strategy for

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders. The Comprehensive Strategy

supports a holistic approach,

emphasizing healthy youth

development. One of the major themes

of the Strategy is to ameliorate the

impact of risk factors that interfere with

healthy youth development. This year

OJJDP released a report, Delinquency

Prevention Works, which explains the

importance of delinquency prevention

and includes information about

successful delinquency prevention

models. The OJJDP-funded Program of

Research on the Causes and Correlates

of Delinquency is documenting that

research-based, risk-focused prevention

is the most cost-effective method for

dealing with juvenile delinquency.

Three of OJJDP’s new initiatives support

the principles of delinquency

prevention: the development of

Assessment Centers and the Child

Abuse and Neglect and the FieldInitiated Research Programs.

The evaluation of the SafeFutures

Program should provide important

information on the value of

comprehensive delinquency prevention

and early intervention programming.

OJJDP is working with a variety of

agencies in the area of delinquency

prevention, including the Center for

Mental Health Services, the Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention, and the

Center for Substance Abuse Treatment,

all part of the U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services. OJJDP is also

working with the health, child welfare,

and education systems through several

interagency workgroups and jointly

funded programs.

OJJDP considers prosecutors to be an

integral component of prevention and

early intervention strategies and will

continue working with prosecutors

through the National District Attorneys

Association.

Comment: In the area of training in

risk-focused prevention strategies, one

respondent suggested that consideration

be given to matching future funds with

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development State Block Grants in

Economic Development Initiatives,

Enterprise Zones, Neighborhood

Development, and Community

Adjustment Planning.

Response: OJJDP and the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) are strengthening

linkages between their respective

programs in regard to risk-focused

prevention strategies. Through an

interagency agreement, HUD is working

as a partner with OJJDP to provide

training and technical assistance in

public housing sites under OJJDP’s

SafeFutures Program. Both HUD and

OJJDP, as well as Education, Labor,

Treasury, and other divisions and

bureaus within the Department of

Justice, are members of the Youth Gang

Consortium. Initiated in December 1995,

the Consortium is facilitating

coordination of gang program

development, information exchange,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21269

and service delivery nationwide. OJJDP

is currently working directly with

Empowerment Zones, Enterprise

Communities, and Enhanced Enterprise

Communities (EZ/EC/EEC’s) under

several major initiatives. Four of the six

SafeFutures sites are located in EC/

EEC’s and are receiving hands-on

technical assistance and training in riskfocused prevention. Seventeen EZ/EC/

EEC’s are receiving training in

implementing a comprehensive youthfocused community policing strategy in

their communities under a joint

program with the Office of Community

Oriented Policing and Community

Relations Service. Other EZ/EC/EEC

initiatives will come online in FY 1996,

including Youth Out of the Education

Mainstream, a joint program of the

Departments of Justice and Education.

Comment: Two respondents

expressed concern that the proposed

plan did not include mental health

needs of youth in the juvenile justice

system and asked that some

discretionary funds be set aside for

mental health programs. One of the

writers stressed that all components of

the juvenile justice system must work

together and also work with the private

sector, teaching hospitals, and family

members to minimize further mental

health problems for at-risk youth and at

the same time protect the public.

Response: OJJDP has provided

leadership in addressing mental health

issues in the juvenile justice system. In

1995, OJJDP supported a mental health

conference, ‘‘Caring for Every Youth’s

Mental Health: An Issue Inseparable

From Youth Crime,’’ and jointly

sponsored the ‘‘Early Intervention

Childhood System of Care Conference’’

in Atlanta, Georgia. With the

Department of Education, OJJDP also

cosponsored a 1996 conference,

‘‘Making Collaboration Work for

Children, School, Families, and

Community,’’ which included a range of

mental health issues.

The State Challenge Grant Program

includes a provision for the support of

mental health programs. To date, 13

States have selected this area as one of

their challenge activities. In addition,

OJJDP is working with the Center for

Mental Health Services to determine

innovative ways in which to collaborate

in the development and implementation

of mental health programs for juveniles

in the juvenile justice system.

Finally, mental health is a key

component of OJJDP’s SafeFutures

Program. The six sites have each been

allocated $150,000 per year to address

the mental health needs of juveniles in

the juvenile justice system, with a focus

on services for juveniles with learning

disabilities, mental disorders, and

juvenile sex offenses.

Comment: One respondent stressed

that substance abuse is a critical issue

with almost all juvenile offenders.

Response: OJJDP concurs with this

observation. In FY 1996, OJJDP will

continue four major drug- and alcoholrelated programs, will work with the

American Probation and Parole

Association, and will collaborate with

the Office of National Drug Control

Policy in expanding related programs in

FY 1997.

Comment: Two writers commented on

OJJDP’s training and technical

assistance for family strengthening

services. One urged that available funds

for new programs be allocated to

prevention and to strengthening

families. Another respondent faulted the

proposed plan for not addressing the

need to teach moral responsibility in the

family unit.

Response: The Office acknowledges

the value of prevention and the

importance of the family’s role in

delinquency prevention. The training

and technical assistance program

endeavors to strengthen families by

assisting communities to enhance the

range of available family support

services and programs. OJJDP believes

that each community knows best the

types of services that need to be made

available to its families. Consequently,

this program seeks to increase the

capacity of communities to identify and

implement programs that meet the

diverse needs of its families.

Comment: Addressing the proposed

program to establish a community-based

approach to combating child

victimization, one writer commended

OJJDP for targeting child victims as a

priority area and for providing

assistance to create a better system to

protect children and support

professionals who work with these

families. The letter also contained three

suggestions. First, spread the net as

wide as possible, instead of narrowly

restricting what type of entities may

apply. Second, provide a ‘‘big tent,’’ by

not overly restricting what other

initiatives must be in place unless

directly related and necessary for a

child welfare reform effort. Third, do

not require match to be in dollars, but

instead accept in-kind match.

Response: The three points the author

raises are valid suggestions that the

Office will take into consideration in

developing the competitive solicitation

for this program.

Comment: Three respondents praised

OJJDP’s emphasis on collaboration. Two

of these comments also raised specific

issues. One pointed out areas where

enhanced collaboration would be

beneficial: adoption opportunities,

maternal and child health programs

(including teen pregnancy prevention),

family preservation, runaway/homeless

youth, information management, data

collection, and evaluation. The other

respondent noted that, although

collaboration was identified as an

important part of the plan, no reference

was made to the parties that are

minimally expected to be involved in

collaborative efforts.

Response: The introduction to the

program plan, and many of the program

descriptions in the plan, refer to OJJDP’s

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders

and the Guide for Implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders. These documents provide a

context for OJJDP’s plan, including Title

V prevention grants and other programs

outside the scope of the plan. The Guide

provides communities with a framework

for preventing delinquency, intervening

in early delinquent behavior, and

responding to serious, violent, and

chronic offending. A key aspect of this

framework and the Title V training

includes a step-by step process for

convening key leaders in a community

to be a part of a collaborative process.

Although adoption, runaway/homeless

services, information managers, data

collectors, and evaluators are not

explicitly stated as required participants

in such a collaborative process, there is

no reason why they would not be

included. In various programs, OJJDP

provides specific guidance as to the type

of groups that should be involved in the

program. However, in view of varied

local needs, priorities, resources, and

existing planning and service delivery

systems, OJJDP does not see a need to

go beyond providing general guidance

on the range of participants.

Introduction to Fiscal Year 1996

Program Plan

Intolerably high rates of juvenile

violence and delinquency,

victimization, school drop out, teen

pregnancy, illegal drug use, and child

abuse and neglect are plaguing our

country. In jurisdictions across the

Nation, over-burdened juvenile justice

and dependency court systems are being

held accountable for redressing the

results of unstable families lacking

parenting skills, communities with

inadequate health and mental health

support networks, fragmented social

service delivery systems, a shortage of

constructive activities for young people,

and easy access to guns and drugs. They

lack the resources necessary to respond
21270 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

to serious, violent, and chronic

delinquency, to hold juveniles

accountable, and to turn back the tide of

increasing violent delinquency by

providing early intervention services for

at-risk juveniles and their families.

The OJJDP fiscal year 1996

Comprehensive Plan seeks to support

programming that is built on sound

research and strengthens collaborations

needed to empower the juvenile justice

and dependency court systems to work

effectively with communities in

preventing and controlling delinquency

and reducing juvenile victimization.

In 1993, OJJDP published a

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders

(Comprehensive Strategy). Designed to

provide a response to the social crisis

we are facing, the Comprehensive

Strategy utilizes statistics, research, and

program evaluations as the basis for a

set of sound principles for establishing

a continuum of care for our children.

The Comprehensive Strategy

emphasizes the importance of local

planning teams assessing the factors

which put youth at risk for delinquency,

determining available resources, and

putting in place prevention programs

that either reduce those risk factors or

provide protective factors that buffer

juveniles from the impact of risk factors.

The Comprehensive Strategy also

stresses the importance of early

intervention for juveniles whose

behavior puts them on one or more

pathways to delinquency and of having

a system of graduated sanctions that can

ensure immediate and appropriate

accountability and treatment for

juvenile offenders.

During FY 1995 OJJDP published a

Guide for Implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders

(Guide). The Guide provides

information on the process of

identifying risk and protective factors in

the community and offers detailed

information about programs known to

prevent delinquency or reduce

recidivism. By providing a foundation

and framework for each community’s

individualized strategy, the Guide can

serve as a powerful tool for States,

cities, counties, and neighborhoods that

are mobilizing to address the problem of

juvenile violence and delinquency.

The Comprehensive Strategy also

served as the foundation for the

development of the National Juvenile

Justice Action Plan (Action Plan),

recently published by the Coordinating

Council on Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention in March. The

Action Plan provides an additional

resource to communities that seek to

balance vigorous enforcement of the law

and prevention services in order to

reduce juvenile delinquency and

violence. The Action Plan prioritizes

Federal activities and resources under

eight critical objectives, each of which

needs to be addressed in order to

effectively combat delinquency and

violence. The Action Plan describes

grants, training, technical assistance,

information dissemination, and research

and evaluation activities that will assist

jurisdictions to: (1) strengthen their

juvenile justice systems; (2) prosecute

certain serious, violent and chronic

juvenile offenders in the criminal justice

system; (3) target youth gun, gang, and

drug violence through comprehensive

policing and prevention techniques; (4)

create positive opportunities for youth;

(5) break the cycle of violence by

addressing child victimization, abuse,

and neglect; (6) mobilize communities

into effective partnerships for change;

(7) conduct research and evaluate

programs; and (8) develop a public

education campaign in order to both get

the message out about successes in

addressing juvenile delinquency and

violence and rebuild confidence in

every community’s ability to impact this

serious problem. These are the activities

that the research, as well as numerous

expert commissions on at-risk children,

youth, families, and communities,

indicates are necessary to make a lasting

difference. It is these activities, coupled

with the Comprehensive Strategy

implementation, that form the basis of

OJJDP’s 1996 Program Plan.

The Program Plan supports a balanced

approach to aggressively addressing

juvenile delinquency and violence

through graduated sanctions, improving

the juvenile justice system’s ability to

respond, and preventing the onset of

delinquency. It takes into account the

short term need to ensure public safety

and the long term imperative of

supporting children’s development into

healthy, productive citizens through a

range of prevention, early intervention,

and graduated sanctions programs.

Three major new program areas were

identified through a process of engaging

OJJDP staff, other Federal agencies, and

juvenile justice practitioners in an

examination of existing programs,

research findings, and the needs of the

field. They are: (1) Developing one-stop,

community-based intake, assessment,

and case referral centers and programs

for juveniles who may require services

or juvenile justice system interventions;

(2) supporting the linkage between

community and law enforcement

responses to youth gun violence; and (3)

improving the dependency and criminal

court system’s and the community’s

response to child abuse and neglect. In

addition, a range of research and

evaluation projects that will expand our

knowledge about juvenile offenders, the

effectiveness of prevention,

intervention, and treatment programs,

and the operation of the juvenile justice

system have been identified for FY 1996

funding.

Enhanced program support in the area

of disproportionate minority

confinement, gender-specific services,

and technical assistance to Native

American Tribes, would also be

provided. Combined with OJJDP

programs being continued in FY 1996,

these new demonstration and support

programs form a continuum of

programming that supports the

objectives of the Action Plan and

mirrors the foundation and framework

of the Comprehensive Strategy.

These continuation activities and

programs and the new FY 1996

programs are at the heart of OJJDP’s

categorical funding efforts. For example,

while focusing on the development of

assessment centers as a new area of

programming, OJJDP will continue to

offer training seminars in the

Comprehensive Strategy and look to the

SafeFutures program to implement the

Comprehensive Strategy model under

existing grants and contracts. Combined,

these activities provide a holistic

approach to prevention and early

intervention programs while enhancing

the juvenile justice system’s capacity to

provide immediate and appropriate

accountability and treatment for

juvenile offenders.

OJJDP’s Part D Gang Program will

continue to support a range of

comprehensive prevention,

intervention, and suppression activities

at the local level, evaluate those

activities, and inform communities

about the nature and extent of gang

activities and effective and innovative

programs through OJJDP’s National

Youth Gang Center. Similarly, the

demonstration program focusing on

juvenile gun violence will complement

existing law enforcement and

prosecutorial training programs by

supporting grassroots community

organization’s efforts to address juvenile

access to, carriage, and use of guns. This

programming will build upon OJJDP’s

youth-focused community policing,

mentoring, and conflict resolution

initiatives, as well as programming in

the area of drug abuse prevention, such

as funding to the Congress of National

Black Churches and the National Center

for Neighborhood Enterprise for local

church and neighborhood-based drug

abuse prevention programs.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21271

In support of the need to break the

cycle of violence, OJJDP’s new

demonstration program to improve

linkages between the dependency and

criminal court systems, child welfare

and social service providers, and family

strengthening programs will

complement ongoing support of Court

Appointed Special Advocates, Child

Advocacy Centers, and prosecutor and

judicial training in the dependency

field, funded under the Victims of Child

Abuse Act of 1990, as amended.

The Plan’s research and evaluation

programming will support many of the

above activities by filling in critical gaps

in our knowledge about the level and

seriousness of juvenile crime and

victimization, its causes and correlates,

and effective programs in preventing

delinquency and violence. At the same

time, OJJDP’s research efforts will also

be geared toward efforts that monitor

and evaluate the ways juveniles are

treated by the juvenile and criminal

justice systems and any trends in this

response, particularly as they relate to

juvenile violence and its impact.

OJJDP is also utilizing its national

perspective to disseminate information

to those at the grassroots level—

practitioners, policy makers, community

leaders, and service providers who are

directly responsible for planning and

implementing policies and programs

that impact on juvenile crime and

violence.

OJJDP will continue to fund

longitudinal research on the causes and

correlates of delinquency, the findings

of which are shared regularly with the

field through OJJDP publications, utilize

state-of-the-art technology to develop

and disseminate an interactive CD-ROM

on programs that work to prevent

delinquency and reduce recidivism, air

national satellite teleconferences on key

topics of relevance to practitioners, and

publish new reports and documents on

timely topics such as school-based

conflict resolution, curfews, the Federal

Educational Records Privacy Act,

confidentiality of juvenile court records,

innovative sentencing options, and

strategies to reduce youth gun violence.

The various contracts, grants,

cooperative agreements, and interagency

fund transfers described in the Program

Plan form a continuum of activity

designed to address the crisis of youth

violence and delinquency in our Nation.

In isolation, this programming can do

little. However, the emphasis of OJJDP’s

programming is on collaboration. It is

through collaboration that Federal,

State, and local agencies; Native

American Tribes; national

organizations; private philanthropies;

the corporate and business sector;

health; mental health and social service

agencies; schools; youth; families; and

clergy can come together to form

partnerships and leverage additional

resources, identify needs and priorities,

and implement innovative strategies.

Together, we can make a difference.

Fiscal Year 1996 Programs

The following are brief summaries of

each of the new and continuation

programs for FY 1996. As indicated

above, the program categories are public

safety and law enforcement;

strengthening the juvenile justice

system; delinquency prevention and

intervention; and child abuse, neglect,

and dependency courts. However,

because many programs have significant

elements of more than one of these

program categories, or generally support

all of OJJDP’s programs, they are listed

in an initial program category called

‘‘Overarching Programs’’. The specific

program priorities within each category

are subject to change with regard to

their priority status, sites for

implementation, and other descriptive

data and information based on the

review and comment process, grantee

performance, application quality, fund

availability, and other factors.

A number of programs contained in

this document have been identified for

funding by Congress with regard to the

grantee(s), the amount of funds, or both.

Such programs are indicated by an

asterisk (*). The 1996 Appropriations

Act Conference Report for the

Departments of Commerce, Justice, and

State, the Judiciary, and Related

Agencies Programs identified six

programs for OJJDP to examine and fund

if warranted. One of these programs is

included in the Plan for continuation

funding. The remaining five will receive

careful consideration for funding in FY

1996.

Fiscal Year 1996 Program Listing

Overarching

Program of Research on the Causes and

Correlates of Delinquency

Field-Initiated Research

Evaluation of SafeFutures

OJJDP Management Evaluation Contract

Juvenile Justice Statistics and Systems

Development

Research Program on Juveniles Taken

into Custody—NCCD

Juveniles Taken into Custody—

Interagency Agreement

Children in Custody—Census

Juvenile Justice Data Resources

National Juvenile Court Data Archive*

National Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention Training and

Technical Assistance Center

Technical Assistance for State

Legislatures

OJJDP Technical Assistance Support

Contract—JJRC

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse

Telecommunications Assistance

Coalition for Juvenile Justice

Insular Area Support*

Public Safety and Law Enforcement

Kids and Guns: Reducing Youth Gun

Violence

Comprehensive Community-Wide

Approach to Gang Prevention,

Intervention, and Suppression

Program

Targeted Outreach with a Gang

Prevention and Intervention

Component (Boys and Girls Clubs)

National Youth Gang Center

Child-Centered Community-Oriented

Policing

Law Enforcement Training and

Technical Assistance Program

Violence Studies*

Hate Crimes

Strengthening the Juvenile Justice

System

Development of OJJDP’s Comprehensive

Strategy for Serious, Violent, and

Chronic Juvenile Offenders

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offender Treatment Program

Community Assessment Centers

Juvenile Restitution: A Balanced

Approach

Training and Technical Assistance

Program to Promote Gender-Specific

Programming for Female Juvenile

Offenders

Technical Assistance to Native

American Programs

National Indicators of Juvenile Violence

and Delinquent Behavior and Related

Risk Factors

Evaluation of the Comprehensive

Community-Wide Approach to Gang

Prevention, Intervention, and

Suppression

Evaluation of Intensive CommunityBased Aftercare Demonstration and

Technical Assistance Program

Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP)

Evaluation

Juvenile Transfers to Criminal Court

Studies

Technical Assistance to Juvenile

Courts*

Juvenile Court Judges Training*

The Juvenile Justice Prosecution Unit

Due Process Advocacy Program

Development

Intensive Community-Based Aftercare

Demonstration and Technical

Assistance Program

Training and Technical Assistance for

National Innovations to Reduce

Disproportionate Minority
21272 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

Confinement (The Deborah Wysinger

Memorial Program)

Juvenile Probation Survey Research

Improvements in Correctional

Education for Juvenile Offenders

Performance-Based Standards for

Juvenile Detention and Corrections

Facilities

Technical Assistance to Juvenile

Corrections and Detention (The James

E. Gould Memorial Program)

Training for Juvenile Corrections and

Detention Staff

Training for Line Staff in Juvenile

Detention and Corrections

Training and Technical Support for

State and Local Jurisdictional Teams

to Focus on Juvenile Corrections and

Detention Overcrowding

National Program Directory

Delinquency Prevention and

Intervention

Training In Risk-Focused Prevention

Strategies

Youth-Centered Conflict Resolution

Pathways to Success

Teens, Crime, and the Community:

Teens in Action in the 90s*

Law-Related Education

Cities in Schools—Federal Interagency

Partnership

Race Against Drugs

The Congress of National Black

Churches: National Anti-Drug Abuse/

Violence Campaign (NADVC)

Community Anti-Drug Abuse Technical

Assistance Voucher Project

Training and Technical Assistance for

Family Strengthening Services

Henry Ford Health System*

Jackie Robinson Center*

Child Abuse and Neglect and

Dependency Courts

A Community-Based Approach to

Combating Child Victimization

Permanent Families for Abused and

Neglected Children*

Parents Anonymous, Inc.*

Lowcountry Children’s Center, Inc.*

Overarching

Program of Research on the Causes and

Correlates of Delinquency

Three projects sites comprise the

Program of Research on the Causes and

Correlates of Delinquency: The

University of Colorado at Boulder, the

University of Pittsburgh, and the State

University of New York at Albany. The

main purpose of FY 1996 funding will

be to support additional data analyses in

support of OJJDP program development.

Results from this program have been

used extensively in the development of

OJJDP’s Comprehensive Strategy for

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders and other program initiatives.

OJJDP began funding this program in

1986 and has invested approximately

$10 million to date. The program has

addressed many issues of juvenile

violence and delinquency. These

include developing and testing causal

models for chronic violent offending

and examining interrelationships among

gang involvement, drug selling, and gun

ownership/use. To date, the Program

has produced a massive amount of

information on the causes and correlates

of delinquent behavior.

Although there is great commonality

across the projects, each has unique

design features. Additionally, each

project has disseminated the results of

its research through a variety of

publications, reports, and presentations.

With FY 1996 funding, each site of

the Causes and Correlates Program will

be provided additional funds to further

analyze the longitudinal data. New

publications, including two joint

publications, will be developed in FY

1996 and both the role of mental health

in delinquency and pathways to

delinquency will be the subject of

further analyses.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantees, Institute of

Behavioral Science, University of

Colorado at Boulder; Western

Psychiatric Institute and Clinic,

University of Pittsburgh; and Hindelang

Criminal Justice Research Center, State

University of New York at Albany. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Field-Initiated Research

Through the FY 1996 Field-Initiated

Research program, OJJDP will solicit

innovative programs that address

critical research and evaluation needs of

the juvenile justice field. Priority

research topics include: youth gangs in

residential facilities; mental health

issues; waiver and transfer to the

juvenile justice system; reporting of

child victimization; improving data

collaboration efforts between juvenile

justice, child welfare, child protective

services, and mental health;

institutional crowding; and topics

related to OJJDP’s Comprehensive

Strategy for Serious, Violent, and

Chronic Juvenile Offenders. In addition

to research topics, this program will also

entertain proposals from State and local

agencies wishing to conduct evaluations

of programs initiated with OJJDP

Formula, Title V, and discretionary

funds that appear to be having

significant impact and offer a possibility

for national replication.

OJJDP will issue a competitive

solicitation for this initiative in FY

1996.

Evaluation of SafeFutures

With FY 1995 funds, OJJDP funded

six communities under the SafeFutures:

Partnerships to Reduce Youth Violence

and Delinquency Program. The program

sites are: Contra Costa County,

California; Fort Belknap Indian

Community, Montana; Boston,

Massachusetts; St. Louis, Missouri;

Seattle, Washington; and Imperial

County, California. The SafeFutures

Program provides support for a

comprehensive prevention,

intervention, and treatment program to

meet the needs of at-risk juveniles and

their families.

Approximately $8 million will be

made available for annual awards over

a 5-year project period to support the

efforts of these jurisdictions to enhance

existing partnerships, integrate juvenile

justice and social services, and provide

a continuum of care that is designed to

reduce the number of serious, violent,

and chronic juvenile offenders.

The Urban Institute received a

competitive 3-year Phase I cooperative

agreement award with FY 1995 funds to

provide a national evaluation of the

SafeFutures program. The evaluation

will consist of both process and impact

components for each funded site. The

evaluation process includes an

examination of planning procedures and

the extent to which each site’s

implementation plan is consistent with

the principles of a continuum of care/

graduated sanctions model. The

evaluation will identify the obstacles

and key factors contributing to the

successful implementation of the

SafeFutures continuum of care model.

The evaluator is responsible for

developing a cross-site monograph

documenting the process of program

implementation for use by other

communities that want to develop and

implement a comprehensive

community-based strategy to address

serious, violent, and chronic

delinquency.

A FY 1996 supplemental award will

be made to the current grantee, the

Urban Institute, to complete first year

funding. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

OJJDP Management Evaluation Contract

The purpose of this contract,

competitively awarded in FY 1995 to

Caliber Associates, is to provide to

OJJDP an expert resource capable of

performing independent, managementoriented evaluations of selected OJJDP

programs. These evaluations are

designed to determine the effectiveness

and efficiency of either individual

projects or groups of projects. The
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21273

contractor also assists OJJDP in

determining how to make the best use

of limited evaluation resources and how

best to design and implement

evaluations. Work plans that have been

requested or will be requested from the

contractor in FY 1996 include:

continuing the evaluation of three

OJJDP-funded bootcamps; continuing to

support the evaluation of Title V

delinquency prevention programs at the

local level; preparation of OJJDP’s Title

V Program report to Congress; providing

assistance to OJJDP program

development working groups; assisting

OJJDP in the creation of an ‘‘evaluation

partnership for juvenile justice’’

designed to improve the number and

quality of evaluations conducted by

Formula Grants Program grantees, other

Federal agencies, private foundations

that fund evaluations, and State and

local governments; and conducting

other short- or long-term evaluations as

required. The contract will be

performed by the current contractor,

Caliber Associates. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Juvenile Justice Statistics and Systems

Development

The Juvenile Justice Statistics and

Systems Development (SSD) Program

was competitively awarded to the

National Center for Juvenile Justice

(NCJJ) in FY 1990 to improve national,

State, and local statistics on juveniles as

victims and offenders. The project has

focused on three major functions: (1)

Assessment of how current information

needs are being met with existing data

collection efforts and recommending

options for improving national level

statistics; (2) analyzing data and

disseminating information gathered

from existing Federal statistical series

and national studies. Based on this

work, OJJDP released the first ‘‘Juvenile

Offenders and Victims: A National

Report’’ in September 1995; and (3)

provision of training and technical

assistance for local agencies in

developing or enhancing management

information systems. A training

curriculum, ‘‘Improving Information for

Rational Decision making in Juvenile

Justice,’’ was drafted for pilot testing.

In this final phase of the SSD project,

NCJJ will complete a long-term plan for

improving national statistics on

juveniles as victims and offenders,

including constructing core data

elements for a national reporting

program for juveniles waived or

transferred to criminal court, an

implementation plan for integrating data

collection on juveniles by juvenile

justice, mental health, and child welfare

agencies, and a report on standardized

measures and instruments for selfreported delinquency surveys. The

project will also make recommendations

to fill information gaps in the areas of

juvenile probation, juvenile court and

law enforcement responses to juvenile

delinquency, violent delinquency, and

child abuse and neglect. In addition, the

SSD Project will provide an update of

Juvenile Offenders and Victims: A

National Report, and work with the

Office of Justice Programs, Crime

Statistics Working Group and other

Federal interagency working groups on

statistics. The project will be

implemented by the current grantee,

NCJJ. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Research Program on Juveniles Taken

Into Custody—NCCD

The Research Program on Juveniles

Taken into Custody was designed and

implemented in FY 1989 in response to

a growing need for comprehensive

juvenile custody data. The project now

has the participation of all State juvenile

corrections agencies. Each year the

project produces a report on juveniles

taken into custody. In FY 1996, the

National Council on Crime and

Delinquency (NCCD) will continue to

refine the State Juvenile Correctional

System Reporting Program. It is

anticipated that individual-level data for

1996 will be representative of more than

85 percent of the at-risk juvenile

population. In addition, NCCD will

prepare reports, including the annual

Juveniles Taken Into Custody report,

providing a detailed summary and

analysis of the most recent data

regarding: (1) The number and

characteristics of juveniles taken into

custody; (2) the rate at which juveniles

are taken into custody; and (3) the

trends demonstrated by the data.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantee, NCCD. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Juveniles Taken Into Custody (JTIC)—

Interagency Agreement

OJJDP will continue its program to

improve the collection of juvenile

custody data through an interagency

agreement with the Bureau of the

Census. This agreement provides for the

collection and processing of individuallevel data on juveniles under State

correctional custody. The Census

Bureau and OJJDP have developed close

working relationships with State

juvenile corrections agencies. Through

these relationships, OJJDP has

developed a program to collect data on

each juvenile in State custody and the

Census Bureau has developed an

understanding of the State data that

allows for ‘‘translation’’ of State

information to a national format. Each

year since 1990, the Census Bureau has

collected this information and

processed it for analysis by the National

Council on Crime and Delinquency

(NCCD).

The resulting analyses are published

in OJJDP’s annual Juveniles Taken Into

Custody report, which is disseminated

to practitioners and planners, and are

used to meet statutory information

requirements in OJJDP’s Annual Report

to the President and Congress.

The program will be implemented in

FY 1996 by the Bureau of the Census

under an interagency agreement.

Children in Custody—Census

Under this ongoing collaborative

program between OJJDP and the U.S.

Bureau of the Census, OJJDP will

transfer funds to the Census Bureau to

complete the 1995 biennial census of

public and private juvenile detention,

correctional, and shelter facilities. The

census describes juvenile custody

facilities in terms of their resident

population, programs, and physical

characteristics. It also provides data on

trends in the use of juvenile custody

facilities for delinquent juveniles and

status offenders. These data are

analyzed and included in OJJDP’s

annual Juveniles Taken Into Custody

report and other statistical reports.

The Census Bureau’s Center for

Survey Methods Research will also

continue to develop and test a rosterbased data collection system designed to

enhance information collected on

juveniles in custody beginning with the

1997 biennial census. Finally, the

Bureau’s Governments Division will

continue its efforts to develop a

complete directory of juvenile justice

facilities and programs. This directory

will serve as the frame for conducting

the 1997 census and other future

surveys. It will contain basic

information on each facility that is

necessary for creating representative

samples. It will also contain basic

administrative information to be used in

conducting the census.

The program will be implemented by

the U.S. Bureau of the Census under an

existing interagency agreement.

Juvenile Justice Data Resources

OJJDP has entered into an agreement

with the Inter-University Consortium for

Political and Social Research (ICPSR) at

the University of Michigan to make

OJJDP data sets routinely available to

researchers. Under this agreement,

ICPSR assures the technical integrity
21274 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

and develops a universal format for the

data. The codebooks, along with the

data, provide clear guidance for

additional analyses. Once prepared,

ICPSR provides access to these data sets

to member institutions and the public.

Among the data sets previously

processed and available through ICPSR

are the Children in Custody Census

(1971–1991); the Conditions of

Confinement Study; and the National

Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted,

Runaway, and Thrownaway Children

(NISMART).

This program will be implemented

under an interagency agreement with

ICPSR. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

National Juvenile Court Data Archive*

The National Juvenile Court Data

Archive collects, processes, analyzes,

and disseminates automated data and

published reports from the Nation’s

juvenile courts. The Archive’s reports

examine referrals, offenses, intake, and

dispositions, in addition to providing

specialized topics such as minorities in

juvenile courts and information on

specific offense categories. The Archive

also provides assistance to jurisdictions

in analyzing their juvenile court data. In

1995, this project produced a bulletin,

Offenders in Juvenile Court 1992, and a

report, Juvenile Court Statistics 1992,

along with a number of OJJDP Fact

Sheets and special analyses.

In FY 1996, the Archive will enhance

the collection, reporting, and analysis of

more detailed data on detention,

dispositions, risk factors, and treatment

data using offender-based data sets from

a sample of juvenile courts.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, the National Center

for Juvenile Justice. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

National Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention Training and

Technical Assistance Center

The National Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention Training and

Technical Assistance Center (NTTAC)

was competitively funded in FY 1995

for a 3-year project period to develop a

national training and technical

assistance clearinghouse, inventory

juvenile justice training/technical

assistance resources, and establish a

data base with respect to these

resources.

In FY 1995, work involved

organization and staffing of the Center,

providing an orientation for OJJDP

training and technical assistance

providers regarding their role in the

Center’s activities, and initial data base

development.

In FY 1996, NTTAC will conduct

needs assessments, support training/

technical assistance program

development, promote collaboration

between OJJDP training/technical

assistance providers, develop training/

technical assistance materials, and

promote evaluation of OJJDP-supported

training and technical assistance. In

addition, NTTAC will prepare program

materials and implement specialized

training, including training-of-trainers

programs, and develop standards and

procedures for academic/professional

accreditation/certification of OJJDP

training and trainers. NTTAC provides a

single, central source for information

pertaining to the availability of OJJDP

supported training/technical assistance

programs and will publish and maintain

an up-to-date catalog of such programs.

This project will be implemented by

the current grantee, Community

Research Associates. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Technical Assistance for State

Legislatures

State legislatures are being pressed to

respond to public fear of juvenile crime

and a loss of confidence in the

capability of the juvenile justice system

to respond effectively. For the most part,

State legislatures have had insufficient

information to properly address juvenile

justice issues. In FY 1995, OJJDP

awarded a two-year grant to the

National Conference of State Legislators

(NCSL) to provide relevant, timely

information on comprehensive

approaches in juvenile justice that are

geared to the legislative environment. In

FY 1995, NCSL convened a Leadership

Forum with invited legislators;

convened several focus groups; and

established an information

clearinghouse function. In FY 1996,

OJJDP will award second-year funding

to the NCSL to further identify, analyze,

and disseminate information to help

State legislatures make more informed

decisions about legislation affecting the

juvenile justice system. A

complementary task will involve

supporting increased communication

between State legislators and State and

local leaders who influence decision

making regarding juvenile justice issues.

NCSL will provide technical assistance

to four States, will continue outreach

activities, and maintain its

clearinghouse function.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, NCSL. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

OJJDP Technical Assistance Support

Contract: Juvenile Justice Resource

Center

This 3-year contract, competitively

awarded in FY 1994, provides technical

assistance and support to OJJDP, its

grantees, and the Coordinating Council

on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention in the areas of program

development, evaluation, training, and

research. This program support contract

will be supplemented in FY 1996. The

contract will be implemented by the

current contractor, Aspen Systems

Corporation. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse

A component of the National Criminal

Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), the

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse (JJC) is

OJJDP’s central source for the collection,

synthesis, and dissemination of

information on all aspects of juvenile

justice, including research and

evaluation findings: State and local

juvenile delinquency prevention and

treatment programs and plans;

availability of resources; training and

educational programs; and statistics. JJC

serves the entire juvenile justice

community, including researchers, law

enforcement officials, judges,

prosecutors, probation and corrections

staff, youth-service personnel,

legislators, the media, and the public.

Among its many support services, JJC

offers toll-free telephone access to

information: prepares specialized

responses to information requests;

produces, warehouses, and distributes

OJJDP publications; exhibits at national

conferences; maintains a comprehensive

juvenile justice library and database;

and administers several electronic

information resources. Recognizing the

critical need to inform juvenile justice

practitioners and policy makers on

promising program approaches, JJC

continually develops and recommends

new products and strategies to

communicate more effectively the

research findings and program activities

of OJJDP and the field. The entire

NCJRS, of which the OJJDP-funded JJC

is a part, is administered by the National

Institute of Justice under a

competitively awarded contract. The

project will be implemented by the

current grantee, Aspen Systems

Corporation. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Telecommunications Assistance

Developments in information

technology and distance training can

expand and enhance OJJDP’s capacity to

disseminate information and provide
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21275

training and technical assistance. These

technologies have the following

advantages when used properly:

increased access to information and

training for persons in the juvenile

justice system; reduced travel costs to

conferences; and reduced time attending

meetings requiring one or more nights

away from one’s home or office.

Additionally, the successful use of

‘‘live’’ satellite teleconferences by OJJDP

during the past year has generated an

enthusiastic response from the field.

During the past twelve months the

grantee has produced four live satellite

teleconferences on the following topics:

Community Collaboration for

Delinquency Prevention; Model Juvenile

Correctional Programs for Serious,

Violent, Chronic Offenders; Youth

Focused Community Policing; and

Juvenile Boot Camps.

OJJDP will continue the competitive

cooperative agreement award to Eastern

Kentucky University in 1994 to provide

program support and technical

assistance for a variety of information

technologies, including audio-graphics,

satellite teleconferences, and fiber

optics. The grantee will also continue to

provide limited technical assistance to

other grantees interested in using this

technology and explore linkages with

key constituent groups to advance

mutual goals and objectives. This

project will be implemented by the

current grantee, Eastern Kentucky

University. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Coalition for Juvenile Justice

The Coalition for Juvenile Justice

supports and facilitates the purposes

and functions of each State’s Juvenile

Justice State Advisory Group (SAG). The

Coalition, acting as a statutorily

authorized, duly chartered Federal

advisory committee, reviews Federal

policies and practices regarding juvenile

justice and delinquency prevention, and

prepares and submits an annual report

and recommendations to the President,

Congress, and the Administrator of

OJJDP. The Coalition also serves as an

information center for the SAGs and

conducts an annual conference to

provide training for SAG members. The

program will be implemented by the

current grantee, the Coalition for

Juvenile Justice. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Insular Area Support*

The purpose of this program is to

provide supplemental financial support

to the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam,

American Samoa, the Trust Territory of

the Pacific Islands (Palau), and the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana

Islands. Funds are available to address

the special needs and problems of

juvenile delinquency in these insular

areas, as specified by Section 261(e) of

the JJDP Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.

5665(e).

Public Safety and Law Enforcement

Kids and Guns: Reducing Youth Gun

Violence

This project is intended to enhance

the effectiveness of comprehensive

youth gun violence reduction efforts by

supporting innovative local communitygenerated strategies. Under a

competitive announcement, OJJDP will

fund community-based organizations,

local units of government, and State

agencies if they can demonstrate that

the program will be community-based,

to strengthen their linkages to broader

youth gun violence reduction efforts.

Applicants will be encouraged to: be

creative in designing initiatives for the

prevention, intervention, and reduction

of youth gun violence in targeted

neighborhoods; coordinate their efforts

with other community-based law

enforcement initiatives, youth-serving

organizations, crime victim

organizations, and the juvenile justice

system; and collaborate with these

agencies to evaluate program

effectiveness. Applicants will also be

required to show that their proposed

initiative reflects current youth gun

violence research and a local assessment

of youth access to guns, why young

people carry guns, and why they use

them.

OJJDP will support an independent

evaluation of this project that focuses on

collecting and analyzing data on the

program implementation process. The

evaluator will design an impact

evaluation in collaboration with OJJDP

and an approved advisory board.

The Reducing Youth Gun Violence

project will be competitively funded in

up to three sites with a 2-year project

period. The evaluation will be

competitively funded under a

cooperative agreement to a single

grantee for a 3-year project period.

Comprehensive Community-Wide

Approach to Gang Prevention,

Intervention, and Suppression Program

This program supports the

implementation of a comprehensive

gang program model in five

jurisdictions. The program was

competitively awarded with FY 1994

funds under a 3-year project period. The

demonstration sites implementing the

model, developed with OJJDP funding

support by the University of Chicago,

are: Mesa, Arizona; Tucson, Arizona;

Riverside, California; Bloomington,

Illinois; and San Antonio, Texas.

Implementation of the comprehensive

gang program model requires the

mobilization of the community to

address gang-related violence by making

available social interventions, providing

social/academic/vocational and other

types of opportunities, supporting gang

suppression through law enforcement,

prosecution and other community

control mechanisms, and supporting

organizational change and development

in community agencies to more

effectively address gang violence prone

youth.

During the past year, the

demonstration sites began an ongoing

problem assessment process to identify

the full nature and extent of the gang

problem in the community and its

potential causes. The assessment

process will also help communities to

understand what may cause gang

violence in their community and to

identify benchmarks by which program

success may be measured. The

demonstration sites also participated in

training and technical assistance

activities, including two cluster

conferences sponsored by OJJDP. In

addition, the demonstration sites began

strategy implementation and service

provision and made progress in

community mobilization, either through

existing planning structures or by

creating new structures.

In FY 1996, demonstration sites will

receive second year funding to continue

implementation of the model program

and build upon the sustained

mobilization, planning and assessment

processes. Additionally, the

demonstration sites will continue to

target youth prone to gang violence

through continuing implementation of

the program model and work with the

independent evaluator of this

demonstration program. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Targeted Outreach With a Gang

Prevention and Intervention Component

(Boys and Girls Clubs)

This program is designed to enable

local Boys and Girls Clubs to prevent

youth from entering gangs and to

intervene with gang members in the

early stages of gang involvement to

divert them from gang activities into

more constructive programs. In FY

1996, Boys and Girls Clubs of America

would provide training and technical

assistance to existing gang prevention

and intervention sites and expand the

gang prevention and intervention

program to 30 additional Boys and Girls
21276 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

Clubs, including those in SafeFutures

sites. This program will be implemented

by the current grantee, the Boys and

Girls Clubs of America. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

National Youth Gang Center

The proliferation of gang problems

ranging from large inner cities to smaller

cities, suburbs, and even rural areas

over the past two decades led to the

development by OJJDP of a

comprehensive, coordinated response to

America’s gang problem. This response

involves five program components, one

of which is the implementation and

operation of the National Youth Gang

Center (NYGC). The NYGC was

competitively funded with FY 1994

funds for a three-year project period.

The purpose of the NYGC is to expand

and maintain the body of critical

knowledge about youth gangs and

effective responses to them. NYGC

assists State and local jurisdictions in

the collection, analysis, and exchange of

information on gang-related

demographics, legislation, research, and

promising program strategies. The

Center also coordinates activities of the

OJJDP Gang Consortium—a group of

Federal agencies, gang program

representatives, and service providers.

Other major tasks include statistical

data collection and analysis on gangs,

analysis of gang legislation, gang

literature review, identification of

promising gang program strategies, and

gang consortium coordination activities.

Fiscal Year 1996 funds will support

second year funding of the NYGC

cooperative agreement to the current

grantee, the Institute for

Intergovernmental Research. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Child Centered Community-Oriented

Policing

In FY 1993, OJJDP provided support

to the New Haven, Connecticut Police

Department and the Yale University

Child Development Center to document

a child-centered, community-oriented

policing model being implemented in

New Haven, Connecticut. The basic

elements of the model are a 10-week

training course in child development for

all new police officers and child

development fellowships for all

community-based district commanders

who direct neighborhood police teams.

The fellowships provide 4 to 6 hours of

training each week over a 3-month

period at Yale’s Child Study Center. The

program also includes: (1) a 24-hour

consultation from a clinical professional

and a police supervisor to patrol officers

who assist children who have been

exposed to violence; (2) weekly case

conferences with police officers,

educators, and child study center staff;

and (3) open police stations, located in

neighborhoods and accessible to

residents for police and related services,

community liaison, and neighborhood

foot patrols.

In FY 1994, BJA community policing

funds helped support the first year of a

3-year training and technical assistance

grant to replicate the program

nationwide. These funds supported the

development of criteria for a request for

proposals, protocols for consultation,

train-the-trainer sessions for New Haven

police and clinical faculty, and the

development of a multi-model strategy

for data collection and program

evaluation. Fiscal Year 1995 OJJDP

funds supported continuation of the

project’s expansion in up to four

replication sites.

Fiscal year 1996 funds will support

the implementation of the five-phase

replication protocol in the four selected

sites, replication site data collection and

analysis activities, and development of

a detailed casebook about the model and

program.

This project will be implemented by

the current grantee, the Yale University

School of Medicine. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Law Enforcement Training and

Technical Assistance Program

This continuation award will

supplement the 3-year law enforcement

and technical assistance support

contract, competitively awarded in FY

1994 to Fox Valley Technical College in

Appleton, Wisconsin. Fiscal year 1996

funds will be used to continue to

provide services under the nationwide

training and technical assistance

program designed to improve law

enforcement’s capability to respond to

juvenile delinquency, to contribute to

delinquency prevention, and to address

issues of missing and exploited children

and child abuse and neglect. Technical

assistance under this contract is

provided in response to a wide variety

of requests from Federal, State, county,

and local agencies with responsibility

for the prevention and control of

juvenile delinquency and juvenile

victimization. The contract supports

continuation of the Gang, Gun, and Drug

Policy Training Program, the Police

Operations Leading to Improved

Children and Youth Services series of

training programs, a Native American

Law Enforcement Training Program, and

a variety of other law enforcement

training programs offered by OJJDP.

This contract will be implemented by

the current contractor, Fox Valley

Technical College. No additional

applications will be solicited for award

of FY 1996 funds.

Violence Studies*

The 1992 Amendments to the JJDP

Act required OJJDP to fund two-year

studies on violence in three urban and

one rural jurisdiction. Building on the

results of OJJDP’s Program of Research

on the Causes and Correlates of

Delinquency, these studies were to

examine the incidence of violence

committed by or against juveniles in

urban and rural areas of the United

States. In FY 1994, OJJDP initiated this

program by supporting studies of

homicides by and of youth in

Milwaukee, Wisconsin and a cross-site

study in rural areas in South Carolina,

Georgia, and Florida. The grantees are

the University of Wisconsin and the

University of South Carolina. In FY

1995, OJJDP provided funding for the

second year of these studies and

initiated two new violence studies in

Los Angeles, California, and

Washington, D.C. The grantees are the

University of Southern California and

the Institute for Law and Justice.

These four studies will provide

valuable information regarding

community violence patterns, with a

particular focus on homicide and

firearm use involving juveniles. They

will also improve the juvenile justice

system by identifying strategic law

enforcement responses to juvenile

violence and by identifying diversion,

prevention, and control programs that

ameliorate juvenile violence.

During FY 1996, the University of

Wisconsin and the University of South

Carolina will analyze their data and

issue their findings with prior year

funds. The University of Southern

California will receive FY 1996 funds to

identify violence prevention programs

and conduct a household survey and

interview adolescents and their care

givers in Los Angeles County. The

Institute for Law and Justice will receive

FY 1996 funds to collect and analyze

aggregate data from various juvenile

justice providers and from a series of

interviews with agency staff serving

adjudicated juveniles. This will be

followed by analysis and the

preparation of a comprehensive report.

The program will be continued by the

current project grantees. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Hate Crimes

In FY 1993, OJJDP competitively

awarded a grant to Education
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21277

Development Center, Inc. (EDC), to

assess existing curriculum materials and

develop a multi-purpose curriculum for

use in educational and institutional

settings. In FYs 1994 and 1995, EDC

developed a multi-purpose curriculum

for hate crime prevention in school and

other classroom settings and the

curriculum was pilot tested in the

eighth grade of the Collins Middle

School in Salem, Massachusetts.

Information received in the pilot test

was evaluated and the curriculum

redesigned. EDC then tested the

curriculum in additional sites in New

York and Florida to ensure that it was

geographically and demographically

representative. In consultation with the

Office for Victims of Crime, EDC also

developed a dissemination strategy for

the curriculum and other products,

including a judge’s guide on sanctions

for juveniles who commit hate crimes.

In FY 1996, EDC will identify school

districts and juvenile justice agencies

across the country who are interested in

receiving training in the curriculum.

EDC will also provide training to

education and juvenile justice personnel

in order to foster adoption of the

curriculum. The project will be

implemented by the current grantee,

EDC. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Strengthening the Juvenile Justice

System

Development of OJJDP’s Comprehensive

Strategy for Serious, Violent, and

Chronic Juvenile Offenders

The National Council on Crime and

Delinquency, in collaboration with

Developmental Research and Programs,

Inc., has completed Phase I and II of a

collaborative effort to support

development and implementation of

OJJDP’s Comprehensive Strategy for

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders. Phase I involved assessing

existing and previously researched

programs in order to identify effective

and promising programs that can be

used in implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy. In Phase II, a

series of reports were combined into a

Guide for Implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy for Serious,

Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders. Phase II also included

convening of a forum, ‘‘Guaranteeing

Safe Passage: A National Forum on

Youth Violence,’’ and holding two

regional training seminars for key

leaders on implementing the

Comprehensive Strategy.

In FY 1996, Phase III of the project

will be funded to provide: targeted

dissemination of the Comprehensive

Strategy at national conferences;

intensive training for selected States to

implement the Comprehensive Strategy

in up to six local jurisdictions;

individualized technical assistance for

the five Serious, Violent, and Chronic

Juvenile Offender Program sites and the

six SafeFutures sites; technical

assistance to a limited number of

individual jurisdictions interested in

implementing the Comprehensive

Strategy; and continued development of

Comprehensive Strategy

implementation materials.

The program will be implemented by

the current grantees, the National

Council on Crime and Delinquency and

Developmental Research and Programs,

Inc., under third-year funding of this 3-

year program. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offender Treatment Program

The Serious, Violent, and Chronic

Juvenile Offender Treatment Program is

designed to assist local jurisdictions in

the development and implementation of

a comprehensive strategy for the

intervention, treatment, and

rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. The

program is an extension of an initial

effort, funded by OJJDP in 1993, entitled

‘‘Accountability-Based Community

Intervention (ABC) Program.’’ Under the

ABC initiative, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

and Washington, D.C. were

competitively funded to plan and

implement a comprehensive graduated

sanctions strategy.

In FY 1994, under a competitive

announcement, OJJDP awarded funds

under the Serious, Violent, and Chronic

Offender Treatment Program to three

additional jurisdictions (Boston,

Massachusetts; Richmond, Virginia; and

Jefferson Parish, Louisiana) to develop

and implement a graduated sanctions

plan. The plan’s basic elements include:

(1) Assess the existing continuum of

secure and nonsecure intervention,

treatment, and rehabilitation services in

each jurisdiction; (2) define the juvenile

offender population; (3) develop and

implement a program strategy; (4)

develop and implement an evaluation;

(5) integrate private nonprofit,

community-based organizations into the

provision of offender services; (6)

incorporate an aftercare program as an

integral component of all residential

placements; (7) develop a resource plan

to enlist the financial and technical

support of other Federal, State, and

local agencies, private foundations, or

other funding sources; and (8) develop

a victim assistance component using

local organizations.

In FY 1995, the ABC Program

jurisdictions completed program

funding and in FY 1996, each of the

three FY 1994 grantees will receive

awards to continue implementation

activities. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Community Assessment Centers

In FY 1996, OJJDP will identify

jurisdictions that have developed

assessment programs for juveniles and

established linkages to integrated

service delivery systems through the use

of assessment centers. The concept of

community assessment centers,

reflecting the use of community input in

a center’s development and operations,

offers many advantages, including

comprehensive needs assessments of atrisk, dependent, or delinquent youth;

improved access to integrated services;

the promotion of alternatives to

incarceration; and an enhanced ability

to monitor racial and gender disparities

in juvenile justice processing through

automated information systems. OJJDP

will examine current efforts across the

Nation in order to identify replicable

components or models that meet, or

could be adapted to meet, the following

goals:

• Ensuring positive outcomes for

youth through the provision of

comprehensive, community-based

assessments that result in the

development of an integrated treatment

plan while avoiding unnecessary

detention.

• Promoting and increasing the use of

alternatives to detention and a system of

graduated sanctions for delinquent

offenders.

• Providing for more accurate and

timely monitoring of the processing of

at-risk, dependent, or delinquent

juveniles to ensure fair and equitable

treatment and outcomes in all phases of

the juvenile justice system.

• Enhancing access to data or records

across disciplines and integrating

assessment, case management, and

community-based services through the

use of automated information systems,

consistent with the principles of

confidentiality.

If it is determined through this initial

survey that a replicable model exists or

can be developed, OJJDP will issue a

competitive solicitation, late in FY

1996, for the replication or development

of the model, including an evaluation

component.

Juvenile Restitution: A Balanced

Approach

OJJDP will continue support of the

juvenile restitution training and

technical assistance program in FY
21278 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

1996. The project design is based on

practitioner recommendations regarding

program needs and on how best to

integrate and institutionalize restitution

and community service as key

components of juvenile justice

dispositions. In 1992, a working group

was convened to help map out a plan

for optimum development of the

components of restitution programs.

Plan components include community

service, victim reparation, victimoffender mediation, offender

employment and supervision,

employment development, and other

program elements designed to establish

restitution as an important element to

improving the juvenile justice system.

This project is guided by balanced and

restorative justice principles, which

include the need to provide a balance of

community protection, offender

competency development, and

accountability in programs for

sanctioning and controlling juvenile

offenders.

In FY 1995, the project assisted three

local jurisdictions to implement the

‘‘balanced approach,’’ participated in

presenting regional ‘‘round tables’’ for

States interested in adopting the

balanced and restorative justice model,

and provided ad hoc technical

assistance. In FY 1996 the project will

continue this work and also develop

guideline materials on the balanced and

restorative justice program.

This project will be implemented by

the current grantee, Florida Atlantic

University. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Training and Technical Assistance

Program to Promote Gender-Specific

Programming for Female Juvenile

Offenders

The 1992 Amendments to the JJDP

Act, Public Law 102–586, 106 Stat.

4982, addressed for the first time the

issue of gender specific services. The

Amendments required States

participating in OJJDP’s State Formula

Grants Program to conduct an analysis

of gender-specific services for the

prevention and treatment of juvenile

delinquency, including the types of

services available, the need for such

services, and a plan for providing

needed gender-specific services for the

prevention and treatment of juvenile

delinquency.

In FY 1995, the OJJDP Gender

Specific Services Program effort focused

on providing training and technical

assistance directly to States and on

providing and promoting the

establishment of State level genderspecific programs. Training and

technical assistance have been provided

to a broad spectrum of policymakers

and service providers regarding services

for juvenile female offenders.

In addition, OJJDP, in conjunction

with the American Correctional

Association (ACA), sponsored a

National Juvenile Female Offender

Conference. The purpose of the

Conference was to provide juvenile

corrections agency staff with an

increased awareness of the unique

problems and rehabilitative needs of

female offenders and improve skills in

working effectively with these

offenders. Innovative juvenile female

corrections programs were presented,

including new approaches and

strategies for operating facility-based

programs for female offenders.

OJJDP also awarded discretionary

grants to implement programs for female

juvenile offenders and at-risk girls.

Under the competitive Program to

Promote Alternative Programs for

Juvenile Female Offenders, OJJDP

funded programs in Washington, D.C.

and Chicago, Illinois. In addition, OJJDP

has funded expansion of the Practical

and Cultural Education Center for Girls,

Inc. (P.A.C.E.) Program in Miami,

Florida. Also, in order to provide the

field with information regarding

existent projects and current research,

OJJDP funded Girls, Incorporated to

conduct a national gender-specific

services forum, which will be held

during FY 1996. Finally, OJJDP’s six

SafeFutures Program sites will

implement components designed to

establish services for at-risk and

delinquent girls.

In FY 1996, OJJDP will award a

competitive grant to support a training

and technical assistance program

designed to build upon the work of

these multiple efforts. It will transfer

lessons learned, stimulate formulation

of State and local policies based upon

research findings and statistical trend

data, and assist community-based youth

serving agencies and juvenile detention

and correctional programs to initiate,

refine, and expand gender-specific

programming that utilizes the strengths

and capabilities unique to females.

In FY 1996, one two-year project

period award will be made based upon

a competitive solicitation.

Technical Assistance to Native

American Programs

Native American programs for

juveniles are facing increasing pressures

because of the increasing numbers of

youth who are involved in drug abuse,

gang activity, and delinquency. Many

reservations are experiencing the

problems that plague communities

nationwide: gang activity; violent crime;

use of weapons; and increasing drug

and alcohol abuse.

From FYs 1992 to 1995, OJJDP funded

four Native American sites to support

the development of programs to impact

these problems. These sites are Gila

River, Pueblo Jemez, the Navajo Nation,

and the Red Lake Band of Chippewas.

Each of these sites has been

implementing programs specifically

designed to meet the needs of the tribe.

In Gila River an alternative school has

been developed and implemented. The

Navajo Nation has expanded the Peace

Maker program to accommodate

additional delinquent offenders and this

approach has been adapted to the Red

Lake and Pueblo Jemez communities.

Additional programming, such as job

skills development, has also been

developed in some of the sites to meet

the needs of their youth.

Although these programs have been

successful, there is a need at these sites

to expand programming options such as

gang prevention and intervention

programs. Other Native American Tribes

have similar problems and needs, as do

programs for Native Americans in many

major metropolitan areas.

OJJDP will fund a national technical

assistance program to support the

development of additional programming

for the four sites that OJJDP currently

funds and to extend programming

support to Tribes and urban tribal

programs across the country. OJJDP will

fund a technical assistance provider to

provide direct technical assistance and

to coordinate the delivery of technical

assistance by other experts. This will be

a three-year technical assistance

program.

National Indicators of Juvenile Violent

and Delinquent Behavior and Related

Risk Factors

The difficulty of using juvenile arrests

as a reliable measure of the level and

nature of juvenile crime is well known.

While juvenile arrest statistics have

been useful as a barometer of juvenile

involvement in crime, there are many

critical dimensions in measuring this

phenomenon that cannot be captured by

any method other than direct measures

of self-reported delinquency. The

Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor

Statistics is launching a 12,000-subject

survey of 12—17-year-old juveniles that

provides an opportunity to supplement

the data collection by asking relevant

questions about delinquency, guns, and

violence. This longitudinal survey also

provides an unprecedented opportunity

to determine the generalizability of the

findings from OJJDP’s Program of

Research on the Causes and Correlates

of Delinquency across a broad range of
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21279

juvenile populations. A transfer of funds

will be made to the Department of

Labor.

Evaluation of the Comprehensive

Community-Wide Approach to Gang

Prevention, Intervention and

Suppression Program

The University of Chicago, School of

Social Services Administration,

received a competitive cooperative

agreement award in FY 1994. This fouryear project period award supports an

evaluation of OJJDP’s Comprehensive

Community-Wide Approach to Gang

Prevention, Intervention, and

Suppression Program. The evaluation

will assist the five program sites in

establishing realistic and measurable

objectives, to document program

implementation, and to measure the

impact of a variety of gang program

strategies. It will also provide interim

feedback to the program implementors.

The five sites are Bloomington, Illinois;

Mesa, Arizona; Tucson, Arizona;

Riverside, California; and San Antonio,

Texas.

In FY 1996, the grantee will: design

and implement organizational surveys

and youth interviews; develop and

implement program tracking and worker

questionnaires and interviews; gather

and track aggregate level offense/

offender client data from police,

prosecutor, probation, school, and social

service program sources; develop and

implement uniform individual level

criminal justice data collection efforts;

consult with local evaluators on

development and implementation of

local site parent/community resident

surveys; and coordinate ongoing efforts

with local researchers conducting

special surveys of gang youth in the

program.

This project will be continued by the

current grantee, the University of

Chicago, School of Social Services

Administration. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Evaluation of Intensive CommunityBased Aftercare Demonstration and

Technical Assistance Program

The National Council on Crime and

Delinquency (NCCD) received a 3-year

competitive FY 1994 grant to conduct a

process evaluation and design an impact

evaluation of the Intensive CommunityBased Aftercare Demonstration and

Technical Assistance Program at sites in

Colorado, New Jersey, Nevada, and

Virginia. NCCD’s initial award funded

the design and implementation of the

process evaluation, the design of an

impact evaluation, and start-up data

collection. A report on the process

evaluation will be submitted in the

spring of 1996. Fiscal Year 1996 funding

will enable NCCD to begin the impact

evaluation. Because of the excellent

progress made during the first two years

on the process evaluation, OJJDP will

extend this program for three additional

years to allow sufficient time for

completion of an impact evaluation.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, NCCD. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP)

Evaluation

The Juvenile Mentoring Program

(JUMP) was funded at 41 sites by OJJDP

in FY 1995. In compliance with Part G,

Section 288H of the JJDP Act, all JUMP

sites are participating in a national

evaluation designed to determine the

success and effectiveness of JUMP in

reducing delinquency and gang

participation, improving academic

performance, and reducing the dropout

rate. Each program participant has been

provided with a JUMP Evaluation

Workbook containing data collection

instruments and instructions on their

use. It provides for the collection of data

on delinquency, school performance,

family functioning, and project

operations. Grantees are responsible for

collecting and analyzing site data and

preparing periodic evaluation reports

for OJJDP.

The evaluation grantee will be

expected to: assist the sites in

implementing the JUMP Evaluation

Workbook; provide other evaluation

technical assistance to the funded sites;

and complete a cross-site evaluation of

results from the 41 sites at the end of the

JUMP program grants. A draft report to

Congress will be prepared based on the

cross-site evaluation.

One two-year cooperative agreement

will be competitively awarded to carry

out this program.

Juvenile Transfers to Criminal Court

Studies

States are increasingly enacting

juvenile code revisions broadening

judicial waiver authority, providing

prosecutor direct file authority, and

mandating transfer of older, more

violent juveniles to criminal court.

Many States are also developing

innovative procedures, such as blending

traditional features of juvenile and

criminal justice sentencing practices,

through statutes that categorize juvenile

offenders into different classes

according to the seriousness of the

offense, designating juvenile or criminal

court for each class, or providing judges

with discretion to make these judgments

at sentencing. Studies of the impact of

criminal court prosecution of juveniles

have yielded mixed conclusions. Solid

research on the intended and

unintended consequences of transfer of

juveniles to criminal court will enable

policy makers and legislatures to

develop statutory provisions and

policies and improve judicial and

prosecutorial waiver and transfer

decisions.

To address this shortage of research

programs, OJJDP competitively funded

two juvenile waiver and transfer

research projects in FY 1995. The first,

awarded to the National Center for

Juvenile Justice, compares juvenile and

criminal court handling of juveniles in

four States that authorize judicial

waiver of serious and violent juvenile

offenders and mandate criminal court

handling for specified categories of

juvenile offenders. The second study,

awarded to the Florida Juvenile Justice

Advisory Board, evaluates Florida’s

system of blending the option of

criminal and juvenile justice system

sentencing to handle serious or violent

juvenile offenders. Additional funding

is planned in FY 1996 to enable the

projects to collect case specific

information on sentence completion and

recidivism data to provide a more

definitive assessment of the impact of

criminal versus juvenile justice system

handling of serious and violent offender

cases.

The projects will be implemented by

the current grantees, the National Center

for Juvenile Justice and the Florida

Juvenile Justice Advisory Board. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Technical Assistance to Juvenile

Courts*

The National Center for Juvenile

Justice (NCJJ), the research division of

the National Council of Juvenile and

Family Court Judges, provides technical

assistance under this grant for juvenile

court practitioners. The focus of the

technical assistance is on court

administration and management,

program development, and special legal

issues. During FY 1995, NCJJ responded

to over 830 requests for technical

assistance.

In FY 1996, special emphasis will be

placed on appropriate sanctions for

handling serious, violent, and chronic

juvenile offenders and other emerging

issues confronting the juvenile court,

such as the increased use of waivers and

transfers. The program will be

implemented by the current grantee,

NCJJ. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.
21280 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

Juvenile Court Judges Training*

The primary focus of this project in

FY 1996 will be to continue and refine

the training and technical assistance

program offered by the National Council

of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.

The objectives of the training are to

supplement law school curriculums by

providing basic training to new juvenile

court judges and to and provide

experienced judges with state-of-the-art

training on developments in juvenile

and family case law and effective

dispositional options. Emphasis is also

placed on alcohol and substance abuse,

child abuse and neglect, gangs and

violence, disproportionate incarceration

of minority youth, and intermediate

sanctions. Training is also provided to

other court personnel, including

juvenile probation officers, aftercare

workers, and child protection and

community treatment providers. In FY

1995, over 13,000 judges and court

personnel received training through

some 80 different programs. In addition,

over 800 training related technical

assistance requests were completed.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, the National

Council of Juvenile and Family Court

Judges. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

The Juvenile Justice Prosecution Unit

OJJDP has historically supported

prosecutor training activities through

the National District Attorneys’

Association (NDAA). To continue that

work, OJJDP awarded a 3-year project

period grant in FY 1995 to the American

Prosecutor Research Institute (APRI)

which is the research and technical

affiliate of NDAA, to establish a Juvenile

Justice Prosecution Unit (JJPU). The

JJPU implements workshops on juvenile

justice related policy, leadership, and

management for chief prosecutors and

unit chiefs; provides background

information to prosecutors on juvenile

justice issues and programs; provides

training; and provides technical

assistance to prosecutors.

The project is based on planning and

input by prosecutors familiar with

juvenile justice needs. The project

draws on the expertise of working

groups of elected or appointed

prosecutors and juvenile unit chiefs to

support project staff in providing

technical assistance, juvenile justicerelated research and program

information to practitioners nationwide,

and training. Start up activities focused

on the collection of information through

a questionnaire that was sent to every

prosecutors’ office regarding juvenile

programs. APRI also sponsored a

National Invitational Symposium on

Juvenile Justice which provided a forum

for prosecutors to exchange ideas,

programs, issues, legislation, and

practices in juvenile justice. APRI will

conduct three workshops for elected

and appointed prosecutors and juvenile

unit chiefs to help improve prosecutor

involvement in the prosecution and

prevention of juvenile delinquency.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, APRI. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Due Process Advocacy Program

Development

In FY 1993, OJJDP funded the

American Bar Association (ABA), in

partnership with the Juvenile Law

Center (JLC) of Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, and the Youth Law

Center (YLC) of San Francisco,

California, to develop strategies to

improve due process and the quality of

legal representation. The goals of the

program are to increase juvenile

offenders’ access to legal services and to

improve the quality of preadjudication,

adjudication, and dispositional

advocacy for juvenile offenders. The

strategies developed will be made

available to State and local bar

associations and other relevant

organizations so that they can develop

approaches to increase the availability

and quality of counsel for juveniles.

In FYs 1994 and 1995, the ABA, JLC,

and YLC conducted an assessment of

the current state of the art with regard

to legal services, training, and

education. This survey included a

review of literature, case law, State

statutes, and a survey of public

defenders, court appointed lawyers, law

school clinical programs, and judges. A

report, entitled ‘‘A Call for Justice, An

assessment of the Access to Counsel and

Quality of Representation in

Delinquency Proceedings’’ was

developed and published by the ABA. It

has been widely distributed to State and

local bar associations, Chairs of State

Juvenile Justice Advisory Committees,

participants in the ABA survey, the

National Association of Child

Advocates, and others.

In FY 1996, training is scheduled to

begin with the first training being

provided to the States of Tennessee,

Maryland, and Virginia. The structure

and scope of the training will be tailored

to fit the needs of each site. A training

manual, under development, will cover

training on key issues such as detention,

transfer or waiver, and dispositions. It is

designed to fill gaps in existing training

programs. The ABA and its partners will

also establish networks with public

defenders offices, children’s law

centers, and others through the

HANDSNET system and mailings that

provide program updates.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantee, ABA. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Intensive Community-Based Aftercare

Demonstration and Technical

Assistance Program

This initiative is designed to support

implementation, training and technical

assistance, and evaluation of an

intensive community-based aftercare

model in four jurisdictions that were

competitively selected to participate in

this demonstration program. The overall

goal of this intensive aftercare model is

to identify and assist high-risk juvenile

offenders to make a gradual transition

from secure confinement back into the

community. The Intensive Aftercare

Program (IAP) model can be viewed as

having three distinct, yet overlapping

segments: (1) pre-release and

preparatory planning activities during

incarceration; (2) structured

transitioning involving the participation

of institutional and aftercare staffs both

prior to and following community

reentry; and (3) long-term reintegrative

activities to insure adequate service

delivery and the required level of social

control.

In FY 1994, The Johns Hopkins

University received a grant to test an

intensive community-based aftercare

model in four demonstration sites:

Denver (Metro), Colorado; Clark County

(Las Vegas), Nevada; Camden and

Newark, New Jersey; and Norfolk,

Virginia. Each of the four sites received

additional funds to support program

implementation in FY 1995. The Johns

Hopkins University contracts with

California State University at

Sacramento to assist in the

implementation process by providing

training and technical assistance and by

making funds available through

contracts to each of the four

demonstration sites. Each of the sites

have developed risk assessment

instruments for use in selecting specific

youth who need this type of intensive

aftercare intervention, hired and trained

staff in the intensive aftercare model,

identified existing and needed

community support (intervention)

services, and identified data necessary

for an accurate evaluation of the

intensive community-based aftercare

program. In addition, each of the sites

has begun random assignment of clients

to the program. The Johns Hopkins

University and its sub-contractor,

California State University at
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21281

Sacramento, have provided continuous

training and technical assistance to both

administrators/managers and line staff

in the intensive community-based

aftercare sites. Staff have been trained in

the theoretical underpinnings of the IAP

model as well as in the practical

applications of the model, such as

techniques for identifying juveniles

appropriate for the program. Training

and technical assistance in this model

have also been available to other States

and OJJDP grantees on a limited basis.

In FY 1996, the sites will continue to

implement and test the aftercare model.

An independent evaluation contractor is

performing a process evaluation and has

designed an impact evaluation to be

implemented under a separate grant.

The Johns Hopkins University will

provide continuing training and

technical assistance to the four selected

sites and will initiate aftercare technical

assistance services to jurisdictions

participating in the OJJDP/Department

of the Interior Youth Environmental

Services (YES) Program and to OJJDP’s

six SafeFutures Program sites. This

funding supports the third budget

period of a 3-year project period.

This project will be implemented by

the current grantee, The Johns Hopkins

University. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Training and Technical Assistance for

National Innovations to Reduce

Disproportionate Minority Confinement

(The Deborah Wysinger Memorial

Program)

National data and studies have shown

that minority children are over

represented in juvenile and criminal

justice facilities across the country.

Accordingly, Congress, in the 1988

reauthorization of the JJDP Act,

amended the Formula Grants Program

State plan requirements to include

addressing disproportionate

confinement of minority juveniles. This

is accomplished by gathering data,

analyzing it to determine the extent to

which minority juveniles are

disproportionately confined, and

designing strategies to address this

issue. A Special Emphasis discretionary

grant program was developed to

demonstrate model approaches to

addressing disproportionate minority

confinement (DMC) in five State pilot

sites (Arizona, Florida, Iowa, North

Carolina, and Oregon). Funds were also

awarded to a national contractor to

provide technical assistance to assist

both the pilot sites and other States, to

evaluate their efforts, and share relevant

information.

In FYs 1994 and 1995, OJJDP made

additional Special Emphasis

discretionary funds available to nonpilot States that had completed data

gathering and assessment in order to

provide initial funding for innovative

projects designed to address DMC.

These efforts to impact DMC have

yielded an important lesson: that

systemic, broad-based interventions are

necessary to reduce DMC. OJJDP

recognizes the need to foster the

development and documentation of

effective strategies using training,

technical assistance, information

dissemination, provision of practical

and targeted resource tools, and public

education. In order to further these

strategies, OJJDP proposes to

competitively solicit innovative

proposals to implement a 3-year

national training, technical assistance,

and information dissemination initiative

focused on the disproportionate

confinement of minority youth. The

selected grantee will: (1) review and

synthesize current State and local

practices and policies designed to

reduce DMC; (2) develop and deliver

training to juvenile justice specialists,

SAG Chairs, and selected grantees to

inform them of DMC requirements, best

practices and issues; (3) assist key OJJDP

grantees to incorporate DMC issues,

practices and policies into their training

and education programs (key grantees

are those training and technical

assistance providers working with

police, the courts and juvenile detention

staff, SafeFutures sites, Title V, and

some State Challenge Program grant

recipients); (4) assist the eight current

DMC grantees to manage and

institutionalize their programs; (5)

support the Formula Grants Program

technical assistance contractor and

OJJDP staff in reviewing State DMC

plans; and (6) develop and carry out a

national dissemination and public

education program on DMC and help

States and localities develop similar

local education programs.

The selected DMC grantee will

coordinate with OJJDP’s National

Training and Technical Assistance

Center and other OJJDP contractors to

identify OJJDP program areas where

DMC policies and practices can be

integrated into ongoing program

activities. The DMC grantee and the

National Training and Technical

Assistance Center will also collaborate

in the development of toolkits and

resource products—screening tools,

assessment, and training components—

to be used by jurisdictions at each stage

of their DMC data gathering, assessment

and program response cycle. Other

resource products will include

educational curricula, technical

assistance protocols for working with

courts, police, intake services, probation

and prosecutor’s offices, assessment and

screening tools, and planning and

analysis tools for juvenile justice

specialists.

OJJDP will competitively award a

single grant to implement a 3-year

national training, technical assistance,

and information dissemination initiative

focused on the disproportionate

confinement of minority youth.

Juvenile Probation Survey Research

Juvenile probation is one of the most

critical areas of the juvenile justice

system. However, there is presently very

little information available on juveniles

on probation. We do not know how

many juveniles are on probation, their

demographic characteristics, their

offenses, or the conditions of their

probation, including length, residential

confinement, electronic monitoring,

restitution, etc. This project will

conduct survey research and develop a

questionnaire to collect this important

information. As States operate their

juvenile probation systems in very

different manners, this project will also

examine how these differences affect the

information collected.

OJJDP plans to undertake a 2-year

project to complete this research

through an interagency agreement with

the Bureau of the Census.

Improvements in Correctional

Education for Juvenile Offenders

The Improvements in Correctional

Education for Juvenile Offenders

Program, a program development and

demonstration initiative, was awarded

to the National Organization for Social

Responsibility (NOSR) in FY 1992. It is

being implemented in three phases:

identification, assessment, and testing

and dissemination. The purpose of the

Program is to assist juvenile corrections

administrators in planning and

implementing improved educational

services for detained and incarcerated

juvenile offenders.

During the 3-year project period, the

grantee implemented the first two

phases of the program. An extensive

literature search of effective education

practices was undertaken and a report

on effective practices in juvenile

corrections education was published

and a training and technical assistance

manual were published. In addition,

three State juvenile corrections facilities

were selected as model sites for testing

effective educational practices. The sites

are: Adobe Mountain School, Arizona;

Lookout Mountain Youth Center,

Colorado; and Sauk Centre, Minnesota.

In FY 1995, NOSR received funding to

implement Phase III, testing and
21282 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

dissemination. The three model test

sites are receiving site specific technical

assistance in the assessment of their

educational programs and in the

development and implementation of

effective educational practices,

including reintegration of appropriate

juveniles back into the mainstream

education system.

Fiscal Year 1996 funds will be used

to assist each site to enhance its

curriculum and implementation strategy

to better address the needs of the

juveniles they serve.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, NOSR. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Performance-Based Standards for

Juvenile Detention and Correctional

Facilities

There is a need to increase the

accountability of detention and

correctional agencies, facilities, and staff

in performing their basic functions. The

development of performance-based

standards has emerged as a primary

strategy for improving conditions of

confinement. This program supports the

development and implementation of

performance-based standards for

juvenile detention and corrections. The

performance measures and standards

being developed will address both

services and the quality of life for

confined juveniles. They will reflect the

consensus of a broadly representative

group of national organizations on the

mission, goals, and objectives of

juvenile detention and corrections.

OJJDP plans to promote nationwide

adoption and implementation of the

measures and standards through a

future training and technical assistance

program.

In FY 1995, OJJDP awarded a

competitive 18-month cooperative

agreement to the Council of Juvenile

Corrections Administrators (CJCA) to

develop national performance-based

standards for juvenile detention and

correctional facilities. A National

Consortium of major professional and

advocacy organizations is providing

technical advice and support in all

aspects of the development and

implementation of the standards. The

project will focus on standards in the

areas of: safety; security; order;

programming/treatment/education;

health; and justice.

During FY 1996, the working groups

will complete the drafting of

performance criteria and measures, as

well as assessment tools for monitoring

performance in all substantive areas. In

addition, all materials will be field

tested and revised as needed. A plan for

implementation will also be submitted.

By 1997, initial performance

standards and a measurement system

will be developed along with specific

plans for an 18-month period of

intensive demonstration and testing of

the performance-based standards and

their impact on juvenile corrections and

detention programming.

The program will be implemented by

the current grantee, CJCA. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Technical Assistance to Juvenile

Corrections and Detention (The James E.

Gould Memorial Program)

The primary purpose of the Technical

Assistance to Juvenile Corrections and

Detention project is to provide

specialized technical assistance to

juvenile corrections, detention, and

community residential service

providers. The grantee, the American

Correctional Association (ACA), also

plans and convenes an annual Juvenile

Corrections and Detention Forum. The

Forum provides an opportunity for

juvenile corrections and detention

leaders to meet and discuss issues,

problems, and solutions to emerging

corrections and detention problems. The

ACA also provides workshops and

conferences on current and emerging

national issues in the field of juvenile

corrections and detention and offers

technical assistance through document

dissemination. OJJDP awarded a FY

1995 competitive grant to ACA to

provide these services over a three-year

project period. The project will be

implemented by the current grantee,

ACA. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Training for Juvenile Corrections and

Detention Staff

In FY 1996, OJJDP will continue to

support the development and

implementation of a comprehensive

training program for juvenile corrections

and detention management staff through

an interagency agreement with the

National Institute of Corrections (NIC).

The program is designed to offer a core

curriculum for juvenile corrections and

detention administrators and mid-level

management personnel in such areas as

leadership development, management,

training of trainers, legal issues, cultural

diversity, the role of the victim in

juvenile corrections, juvenile

programming for specialized needs of

offenders, and managing the violent or

disruptive offender. The training is

conducted at the NIC Academy and

regionally. This program is a

continuation activity, initiated in FY

1991 under an interagency agreement

with NIC that was renewed in FY 1994.

No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Training for Line Staff in Juvenile

Detention and Corrections

In FY 1994, the National Juvenile

Detention Association (NJDA) was

awarded a competitive three-year

project period grant to establish a

training program to meet the needs of

the more than 38,000 line staff of

juvenile detention and corrections

facilities. In the first year under the

grant, NJDA revised and updated a 40-

hour Detention Careworker curriculum,

developed a 24-hour Train-the-Trainer

for the Detention Careworker

curriculum, conducted 16 separate

trainings and developed new lesson

plans in 7 substantive areas, conducted

a national training needs assessment for

juvenile corrections careworkers, and

provided technical assistance to 37

agencies and training to 887 line staff.

In FY 1996, NJDA will continue to

offer training to practitioners, develop

new curriculums around emerging

issues, and complete the development

and testing of a 40-hour basic

careworker curriculum for juvenile

corrections line staff. Additionally,

NJDA will deliver selected training

programs for juvenile detention and

corrections line staff on a number of

topical issues.

This project will be implemented by

the current grantee, NJDA. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Training and Technical Support for

State and Local Jurisdictional Teams To

Focus on Juvenile Corrections and

Detention Overcrowding

The Conditions of Confinement:

Juvenile Detention and Correctional

Facilities Research Report (1994),

completed by Abt Associates under an

OJJDP grant, identified overcrowding as

the most urgent problem facing juvenile

corrections and detention facilities.

Overcrowding in juvenile facilities is a

function of decisions and policies made

at the State, county, and city levels. The

trend in a number of jurisdictions

toward an increased use of detention

and commitment to State facilities has

been reversed when key decision

makers, such as the chief judge, chief of

police, director of the local detention

facility, head of the State juvenile

correctional agency, and others who

affect the flow of juveniles through the

system, agree to make decisions

collaboratively and to modify practices

and policies. In some instances

modification has occurred in response
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21283

to court orders. Compliance with court

orders is improved with the support of

enhanced interagency communication

and planning among those agencies

affecting the flow of juveniles through

the system.

In addressing the problems of

overcrowded facilities, OJJDP

considered the recommendations of the

Conditions of Confinement study

regarding overcrowding, the data on

over representation of minority youth in

confinement, and other information that

suggests crowding in juvenile facilities

must be reduced. Policy makers can do

this by increasing capacity, where

necessary, or by taking other steps to

control crowding. This project,

competitively awarded to the National

Juvenile Detention Association (NJDA)

in FY 1994 for a three-year project

period, provides training and technical

assistance materials for use by State and

local jurisdictional teams. In FY 1995,

the project collected information on

strategies that are used or could be used

to control crowding, and prepared

training and technical assistance

materials. Based on the demonstrated

need for assistance and related criteria,

NJDA will select three jurisdictions in

FY 1996 for onsite development,

implementation, and testing of

crowding reduction procedures, and

will provide regional training on these

procedures to other jurisdictions.

A FY 1996 continuation award will be

made to the current grantee, the

National Juvenile Detention

Association. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

National Program Directory

In FY 1995, OJJDP initiated the

development of a National Program

Directory, a national list of all juvenile

justice offices, facilities, and programs

in the United States, through the Bureau

of the Census. The Census Bureau

developed a directory format for

juvenile detention and correctional

facilities, which would contain the

addresses and phone numbers of

localities, names and titles of directors,

and important classification

information, classify facilities by the

agency or firm that operates them, and

list the functions of the facility. This

structure was developed specifically to

provide OJJDP with the ability to

conduct surveys and censuses of

juvenile custody facilities. The effort

placed into developing this structure

would also translate to other areas, such

as a list of juvenile probation offices.

Beyond developing the computer

structure, this project will develop, in

FY 1996, the actual sampling frame or

address list. The development of

complete frames for any segment of the

juvenile justice system requires many

different approaches. The Census

Bureau will use contacts with

professional organizations to compile a

preliminary list of juvenile facilities,

courts, probation offices, and programs.

The Census Bureau will then seek

contacts in each State for further

clarification of the lists, following up

until a complete list of all programs of

interest has been compiled. This

program will be funded through an

interagency agreement with the Census

Bureau. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

Delinquency Prevention and

Intervention

Training in Risk-Focused Prevention

Strategies

OJJDP will provide additional training

in FY 1996 to communities interested in

developing a risk-focused delinquency

prevention strategy. This training

supports OJJDP’s Title V Delinquency

Prevention Incentive Grants Program,

codified at 42 U.S.C. § 5781–5785, by

providing the knowledge and skills

necessary for State, local, and private

agency officials and citizens to identify

and address risk factors that lead to

violent and delinquent behavior in

children. In FYs 1994 and 1995, this

training was offered to all States,

territories, and the District of Columbia

that received discretionary grants from

OJJDP to implement the Title V

Program.

OJJDP awarded a new contract with

FY 1995 funds to perform ongoing tasks

and provide prevention training in the

following areas: (1) orientation on risk

and resiliency-focused prevention

theories and strategies for local

community leaders; (2) the

identification, assessment and

addressing of risk factors; (3) —training

of trainers— in selected States to

provide a statewide capacity to train

communities in risk-focused prevention;

and (4) development of training

curriculums and materials to increase

the capacity of States and localities to

conduct risk-focused prevention

training. These services will be

provided through second year funding

of a competitive contract awarded to

Developmental Research and Programs,

Inc. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Youth-Centered Conflict Resolution

Increasing levels of juvenile violence

have become a national concern.

Violence in and around school

campuses and conflict among juveniles

both in schools and neighborhoods have

become extremely problematic for

school administrators, teachers, parents,

community leaders, and the public.

While experts may debate the merits

and impact of the varied contributing

factors, most would agree that school

curriculums do not provide for the

systematic teaching of problem- and

conflict-resolving skills.

To address this issue, OJJDP awarded

a competitive grant in FY 1995 to the

Illinois Institute for Dispute Resolution

to develop, in concert with other

established conflict resolution

organizations, a national strategy for

broad-based education and training in

the use of conflict resolution skills. In

support of this task, the grantee is to

conduct four regional conferences based

on a joint publication being developed

by the Departments of Justice and

Education. The grantee will also provide

technical assistance and disseminate

information about conflict resolution

programs. The project will be continued

by the current grantee, the Illinois

Institute for Dispute Resolution. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Pathways to Success

This project is a collaborative effort

among OJJDP, the Bureau of Justice

Assistance (BJA), and the National

Endowment for the Arts. The Pathways

to Success Program promotes vocational

skills, entrepreneurial initiatives,

recreation, and arts education during

afterschool, weekend, and summer

hours by making a variety of

opportunities available to at-risk youth.

Through a competitive process, five

sites were funded in FY 1995, the first

year of a 2-year project period. The

selected programs are located in:

Newport County, Rhode Island; New

York, New York; Anchorage, Alaska;

Washington, D.C.; and Miami, Florida.

The SOS Playbacks: Arts-Based

Delinquency Based Juvenile

Delinquency Prevention Program,

located in Newport County, Rhode

Island, provides an afterschool arts

program for students aged 13–18 from

local public housing developments.

Students in the program participate in

peer-to-peer support and education

through the mediums of visual arts,

dance, and drama.

Project CLEAR, located in New York

City, provides extended day programs to

students in two elementary schools that

have a high percentage of students who

live in low-income areas and have

limited English proficiency. Services

include academic tutoring, arts in

education instruction, physical

recreation, and group counseling

services. Two hundred students in
21284 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

grades 1–6 are served annually.

Saturday programs for targeted youth

and their families and evening programs

for parents are also provided.

The Anchorage School District and

the out-North Theater in Anchorage,

Alaska have collaborated to provide

afterschool and summer theater

programs for students aged 12–14 from

low income areas in Anchorage.

Students involved in this program will

produce and perform in plays they have

written that reflect their personal life

experiences.

The District of Columbia Courts

Elementary Baseball Program provides

combined recreational activities,

tutoring activities, one-to-one

mentoring, and parent workshops for

students aged 6–10 who are enrolled in

Garrett Elementary School in

Washington, D.C. This school is located

in one of the highest crime areas in

Washington, D.C. The central activity of

this program is interleague baseball

games. Team participation is contingent

upon student participation in tutoring

and other activities.

The Aspira ‘‘Youth Sanctuary’’

Program, located in Dade County,

Florida, addresses delinquency and

other behavioral problems of Latino

youth aged 10–16 who reside in migrant

camps. This program teaches art,

including community mural projects,

folklore dance incorporating Latino

dancing, and provides recreation

opportunities for targeted students

afterschool, on weekends, and during

the summer months. Parent training

workshops and parent support are key

activities in this program.

This Program will be implemented in

FY 1996 by the current project grantees.

No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Teens, Crime, and the Community:

Teens in Action in the 90s*

This continuation program is

conducted by the National Crime

Prevention Council (NCPC) in

partnership with the National Institute

for Citizen Education in the Law

(NICEL). Teens in Action in the 90s is

a special application of the Teens,

Crime, and Community (TCC) program

that operates on the premise that teens,

who are disproportionately the victims

of crimes, can contribute to improving

their schools and communities through

a broad array of activities.

During FY 1995, the TCC Program

expanded to more than 100 new sites,

primarily through five regional

expansion centers located in New

England, the Mid-Atlantic States, the

Mid-South, the Deep South, and the

Pacific Northwest Coast. These TCC

projects utilized Boys and Girls Clubs of

America and their affiliates in six

localities to become partners in TCC

efforts in these cities.

More than 4,000 teachers, social

service providers, juvenile justice

professionals, law enforcement officers,

and other community leaders

participated in intensive training to help

sites implement the TCC curriculum in

their communities. Over 1,000

individuals benefited from technical

assistance, materials, and consultation

regarding TCC in areas of program

implementation, fund development, and

networking opportunities.

In FY 1996, NCPC and NICEL will

implement the National Teens, Crime,

and the Community Program in

additional locations across the country.

In addition, TCC will seek to implement

projects in the six SafeFutures Program

sites.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantee, NCPC. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Law-Related Education (LRE)

The national Law-Related Education

(LRE) Program ‘‘Youth for Justice’’

includes five coordinated LRE projects

and programs operating in 48 States and

4 non-State jurisdictions.

The program’s purpose is to provide

training and technical assistance to

State and local school jurisdictions that

will result in the institutionalization of

quality LRE programs for at-risk

juveniles. The focus of the program

during FY 1996 will be to continue

linking LRE to violence reduction and to

involve program participants in finding

solutions to juvenile violence. The

major components of the program are

coordination and management, training

and technical assistance, assistance to

local program sites, public information,

and program development and

assessment.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantees, the American Bar

Association, the Center for Civic

Education, the Constitutional Rights

Foundation, the National Institute for

Citizen Education in the Law, and the

Phi Alpha Delta Legal Fraternity. No

additional applications will be solicited

in FY 1996.

Cities in Schools’ Federal Interagency

Partnership

This program is a continuation of a

national school dropout prevention

model developed and implemented by

Cities in Schools, Inc. The Cities in

Schools (CIS) Program provides training

and technical assistance to States and

local communities, enabling them to

adapt and implement the CIS model.

The model brings social, employment,

mental health, drug prevention,

entrepreneurship, and other resources to

high-risk youth and their families in the

school setting. Where CIS State

organizations are established, they

assume primary responsibility for local

program replication during the Federal

interagency partnership.

The Federal Interagency Partnership

program is based on a program strategy

that is designed to enhance CIS, Inc.’s

capability to provide training and

technical assistance, introduce selected

initiatives to CIS youth at the local

level, disseminate information, and

network with Federal agencies on behalf

of State and local CIS programs.

Fiscal year 1995 accomplishments

include the following: establishment of

15 student-run entrepreneurship

programs; establishment of a consulting

program consisting of a pool of CIS State

and local program directors and other

experts to support the expanded

technical assistance needs of the CIS

network of State and local programs;

production and distribution of two

publications, a catalogue of program

resources, and a history of the CIS

program; a three-day training session

featuring presentations from Federal

agencies on the financial and

programmatic resources available

through their Departments; and a

catalogue of State and local programs in

the areas of family strengthening and

parent participation, working with

adjudicated or incarcerated youth,

violence prevention, prevention of AIDS

and sexually transmitted diseases, and

conflict resolution.

The Cities in Schools Federal

Interagency Partnership program is

jointly funded by OJJDP and the

Departments of Health and Human

Services and Commerce under an OJJDP

grant. The project will be implemented

by the current grantee, Cities in Schools,

Inc. No additional applications will be

solicited in FY 1996.

Race Against Drugs

The Race Against Drugs (RAD)

Program is a unique drug awareness,

education, and prevention campaign

designed to help young people

understand the dangers of drugs and

live a non-impaired lifestyle. With help

and assistance from 23 motor sports

organizations, the cooperation of the

Federal Bureau of Investigation, the

Drug Enforcement Administration, the

U.S. Navy, and other government

agencies, the National Child Safety

Council, and a variety of corporate

sponsors, RAD has become an exciting

and innovative addition to drug abuse
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21285

prevention programs. RAD activities

now include national drug awareness

and prevention activities at schools,

malls, and motor sport events; television

and public service announcements,

posters, and signage on T-shirts, hats,

decals, etc.; and specialized programs

like the ‘‘Adopt-A-School Essay and

Scholarship’’ and ‘‘Winner’s Circle’’

programs. Curriculum materials include

the Be A Winner Action Book for 6–8th

graders, a RAD Adult Guide, and a RAD

coloring book for K–4th graders.

In FY 1995 the program was funded

to develop additional and updated

curriculum materials, reach additional

program sites, and demonstrate the

Winner’s Circle Program in Seattle,

Washington. It was funded jointly by

the Bureau of Justice Assistance and

OJJDP with the Center for Substance

Abuse Prevention (CSAP) providing

extensive printing and clearinghouse

support.

In FY 1996, OJJDP will continue

funding to assist RAD to expand

program operations to reach 500,000

youth at 300 RAD events annually,

conduct 20 adopt-a-school programs in

conjunction with major racing events,

develop mobile educational exhibits

and a variety of new educational

materials, and conduct a program

evaluation. OJJDP anticipates that the

program will operate with private direct

funding and in-kind support at the end

of the project period.

The program will be implemented by

the current grantee, the National Child

Safety Council. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

The Congress of National Black

Churches: National Anti-Drug Abuse/

Violence Campaign (NADVC)

OJJDP will continue to fund the

Congress of National Black Churches’

(CNBC) national public awareness and

mobilization strategy to address the

problem of juvenile drug abuse and

violence in targeted communities. The

goal of the CNBC national strategy is to

summon, focus, and coordinate the

leadership of the black religious

community, in cooperation with the

Department of Justice and other Federal

agencies and organizations, to mobilize

groups of community residents to

combat juvenile drug abuse and drugrelated violence.

The campaign now operates in 37 city

alliances, having grown from 5 original

target cities. The smallest of these

alliances consists of 6 churches and the

largest has 135 churches. The NADVC

program involves approximately 2,220

clergy and affects 1.5 million youth and

the adults who influence their lives.

NADVC also provides technical support

to four statewide religious coalitions.

As a result of NADVC’s technical

assistance and training workshops,

project sites have been able to leverage

approximately $1.5 million in private

and government funding.

NADVC has contributed to the

planning and presentation of numerous

technical assistance and training

conferences on violence and substance

abuse prevention and produced a

National Training and Site Development

Guide and a video to assist sites

implementing the NADVC model.

The Program will be expanded in FY

1996 to address family violence

intervention issues and target up to 6

additional cities, for a total of 43 cities.

Consideration will be given to

SafeFutures sites when selecting the

new sites. This program will be

implemented by the current grantee,

CNBC. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

Community Anti-Drug-Abuse Technical

Assistance Voucher Project

The National Center for Neighborhood

Enterprise (NCNE) has extended its

outreach to community-based grassroots

organizations around the country that

are working effectively to solve the

problems of juvenile drug abuse. This

project has three goals: (1) to allow

various neighborhood groups to

inexpensively purchase needed services

through the use of technical assistance

vouchers disbursed by NCNE; (2) to

demonstrate the cost-effective use of

vouchers to help neighborhood groups

secure technical assistance for antidrug-abuse projects to serve high-risk

youth; and (3) to extend OJJDP funded

technical assistance to groups that are

often excluded because they lack the

administrative sophistication, technical

and grantsmanship skills, and resources

to participate in traditional competitive

grant programs.

The Technical Assistance Voucher

Project builds upon the strengths and

problem solving capacity existing in

low-income communities nationwide

and provides much needed technical

and monetary resources to grassroots

organizations that are operating youth

anti-drug programs and activities for

high risk youth.

The program awards 15–25 vouchers,

ranging from $1,000 to $10,000

annually. Eligible organizations must

have: proven effectiveness in serving a

specific constituency; a small operating

budget ($150,000 maximum); 501(c)(3)

tax exempt status; and a program that

targets high-risk youth and/or juvenile

offenders; and leadership that is

indigenous to the community. Vouchers

can be used for planning, proposal

writing, program promotion, legal

assistance, financial management, and

other activities. This project will be

implemented by the current grantee,

NCNE. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

Training and Technical Assistance for

Family Strengthening Services

Prevention, early intervention, and

effective crisis intervention are critical

elements in a community’s family

support system. In many communities,

one or more of these elements may be

missing or programs may not be

coordinated. In addition, technical

assistance and training have not

generally been available to community

organizations and agencies providing

family strengthening services. In

response, OJJDP awarded a three-year

competitive grant in FY 1995 to the

University of Utah’s Department of

Health and Education to provide

training and technical assistance to

communities interested in establishing

or enhancing a continuum of familystrengthening efforts, including parent

training. Grant activities include a

literature review, national search, rating,

and selection of family strengthening

models, development and

implementation of a marketing and

dissemination strategy, and the

selection of sites to receive intensive

technical assistance. The grantee will

also convene two regional conferences,

produce user and training-of-trainers

guides, and distribute videos of several

family-strengthening workshops.

This program will be implemented by

the current grantee, the University of

Utah’s Department of Health and

Education. No additional applications

will be solicited in FY 1996.

Henry Ford Health System*

In FY 1995, the Henry Ford Health

System (HFHS) initiated a two-year

program in Detroit, Michigan called

‘‘Reducing Youth Violence Through

School-Based Initiatives.’’ The program

serves seven elementary schools and

two middle schools that feed into a

Detroit high school. Primary Program

activities are to identify juveniles at

high risk, assess the needs of target

youth, identify resources available in

the community to serve those needs,

coordinate community resources to

create comprehensive programs, and

evaluate the efficacy of the program.

Participants include teachers, family

members, community programs and

agencies, as well as student and health

center staff. This project will be

implemented by the current grantee,
21286 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

HFHS. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

Jackie Robinson Center*

This three-year project, initially

funded in FY 1994, supports expansion

of the Brooklyn USA Athletic

Association, Inc.’s Jackie Robinson

Centers for Physical Culture (JRC),

which provide a comprehensive youth

development and delinquency and

crime prevention program. Presently,

there are 18 school and 3 replication

sites in operation serving in-school

youth between the ages of 8 and 18.

JRC’s services are designed to prevent

New York City youth from becoming

involved in street gangs, violence, or

drug and alcohol abuse, and to alert,

educate, and inform youth and their

parents about these issues. Activities

conducted by JRC include development

of positive peer groups, youth

leadership, social and personal skills

training, academic tutoring, sports,

cultural activities, rap and discussion

groups, individual counseling, parent

education and involvement, community

events, on-site crisis intervention,

referral to treatment, physical/medical

examinations, social service referral,

and college and job placement

assistance. JRC has increased its

recruitment and registration from 750 to

6,600 students. Students in each of the

18 sites participated in a minimum of 3

special events during the year.

In FY 1996, JRC will develop a data

bank system to monitor the in-school

progress of participating students

through indicators such as attendance,

academic, and behavioral records. This

project will be implemented by the

current grantee, the Brooklyn USA

Athletic Association, Inc. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Child Abuse and Neglect and

Dependency Courts

A Community-Based Approach to

Combating Child Victimization

Statistics on child abuse and neglect

are alarming. In 1994 alone, an

estimated 3.1 million abused or

neglected children were reported to

public welfare agencies. More than 1

million of these cases were

substantiated. Each year, an estimated

2,000 children—most under 4 years

old—die at the hands of parents or

caretakers.

Research demonstrating a link

between child victimization and later

involvement in violent delinquency

suggests the efficacy of preventing child

abuse and neglect and treating the

victims of abuse as a means of reducing

later violent and delinquent behavior.

To break the cycle of childhood

victimization and violent delinquency,

OJJDP plans to enter into a joint

solicitation with other bureaus of the

Office of Justice Programs, in

cooperation with other Federal agencies,

to foster comprehensive, communitybased, interagency and multi

disciplinary approaches to the

prevention, identification, intervention,

and treatment of child abuse and

neglect.

It is anticipated that two to five

demonstration projects will be

competitively awarded in FY 1996 as

part of a 5-year project period. Sites will

be required to address each of the

following program areas: (1) data

collection and evaluation; (2) system

reform and accountability; (3) training

and technical support to practitioners;

(4) provision of a continuum of services

to protect children and support families;

and (5) prevention education and public

information.

Training and technical assistance will

be made available to selected sites in a

number of areas, including system

reform, practitioner training, victim

advocacy, team-building and

interagency collaboration, familystrengthening services assessment and

implementation, and diversity/cultural

awareness training.

Applicants will be expected to

demonstrate an ability to leverage other

available sources of funds and

document a readiness to engage in

reform of child protection systems,

progress in assessing and addressing

child abuse and neglect, and broad

community representation,

commitment, and participation.

Permanent Families for Abused and

Neglected Children*

This is a national project to prevent

unnecessary foster care placement of

abused and neglected children, to

reunify the families of children in care,

and to ensure permanent adoptive

homes when reunification is impossible.

The purpose is to ensure that foster care

is used only as a last resort and as a

temporary solution. Accordingly, the

project is designed to ensure that

government’s responsibility to children

in foster care is acknowledged by the

appropriate disciplines. Project

activities include national training

programs for judges, social service

personnel, citizen volunteers, and

others under the Reasonable Efforts

Provision of the Social Security Act, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15),

training in selected States, and

implementation of a model guide for

risk assessment.

The project is implemented by the

National Council of Juvenile and Family

Court Judges (NCJFCJ) . NCJFCJ provides

support services to coordinate programs,

trains judges in the Court Appointed

Special Advocate (CASA) program, and

implements the Model Court Program in

additional jurisdictions.

In FY 1996, a new program to divert

families from the court system through

arbitration under court supervision will

be developed in three model courts

using other funding sources. However,

the program will be incorporated into

NCJFCJ’s permanency planning training.

The Permanent Families for Abused

and Neglected Children Program will be

implemented by the current grantee,

NCJFCJ. No additional applications will

be solicited in FY 1996.

Parents Anonymous, Inc.*

Parents Anonymous, Inc. (PA)

establishes groups and adjunct programs

that respond to the needs of families

through a mutual support model of

parents and professionals sharing their

expertise and their belief in each

individual’s ability to grow and change

in ways that create caring and safe

environments for themselves and their

children. In FY 1994, OJJDP began

supporting PA’s Juvenile Justice Project

to enhance PA’s mission to prevent

child abuse and neglect by developing

a new capability within the PA network

to address the needs of high-risk, innercity populations, with an emphasis on

minority parents.

As a result of OJJDP funding, PA has:

developed 31 new groups in 11 states;

produced and disseminated the booklet,

I Am A Parents Anonymous Parent, in

Spanish; convened a National

Leadership Conference in Washington,

D.C. in February 1995 which focused on

outreach, recruitment and services for

families of color and collaboration with

juvenile justice agencies; convened an

Executive Directors’ Leadership

Conference in Claremont, California, in

November 1995; conducted written

surveys, focus groups, and intensive

telephone interviews to gather ‘‘best

practices’’ data; produced and

disseminated 12,000 copies of an

expanded Innovations PA newsletter;

and produced and disseminated 15,000

copies of The Parent Networker, a new

semi-annual publication focused on

issues of diversity.

In FY 1996, PA will convene at least

two regional trainings focused on

working with families of color in highrisk settings, produce and disseminate

two technical assistance bulletins, one

on parent involvement as it relates to
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21287

communities and families of color, and

the other on strategies for providing PA

programs for incarcerated parents,

conduct two teleconference trainings,

provide training and technical

assistance to implement PA services in

up to six SafeFutures Program sites,

expand the number of PA affiliates

working with the Juvenile Justice

Project, and publish and disseminate a

‘‘PA Best Practices’’ manual.

The project will be implemented by

the current grantee, PA. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Lowcountry Children’s Center, Inc.*

OJJDP will continue to fund

Lowcountry Children’s Center, Inc.

(LCC) of Charleston, South Carolina in

its expansion and coordination of the

services required to create a model

multi disciplinary, crisis intervention

program for child victims of sexual

assault and their families. LCC’s goals

are to: (1) continue their existing multi

disciplinary services; (2) enhance

support and coordination between law

enforcement and the Solicitor’s

(prosecutors) office in cases concerning

allegations of child physical and sexual

assault; (3) provide medical

examination in a timely manner; and (4)

collect and analyze data regarding the

demographics of child victims and their

families and the characteristics of the

perpetrator, the sexual assault, and the

community response. In 1995, as a

result of this multi disciplinary

approach, LCC has exceeded its initial

projections regarding the number of

individual children who have been

assessed and the number of clinical

treatment units provided to these

children and their families (as of

December 31, 1995). LCC provided

physical examinations for 194 children

alleged to be victims of sexual abuse in

a child-oriented environment and in a

timely manner.

This project will be continued by the

current grantee, LCC, Inc. No additional

applications will be solicited in FY

1996.

Shay Bilchik,

Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention.

Office for Victims of Crime Fiscal Year

1996 Discretionary Program Plan

Victim Services 2000: A Vision for the

21st Century

Introduction

The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC)

is pleased to announce its Discretionary

Program Plan for Fiscal Year 1996

(FY96). OVC was created to help ensure

justice and healing for our nation’s

crime victims. It carries out this broad

mandate by funding crucial victim

services, supporting training for the

diverse professionals who work with

crime victims, and developing programs

to enhance victims’ rights and services.

OVC administers two formula and

many discretionary grant programs

designed to benefit victims. These

programs are funded by the Crime

Victims Fund, which is derived from

the fines, penalty assessments, and bail

forfeitures of Federal criminal

offenders—not from tax dollars. In

FY96, OVC has approximately $220

million to support critical services to

crime victims, national-scope training

and technical assistance, and

demonstration programs. Under the

Victims of Crime Act (VOCA), 97

percent of this money is allocated to

States for the funding of victim

assistance and compensation programs.

Three percent of the Fund’s annual

collections must be spent for

discretionary programs, and under the

Children’s Justice Act, $1.5 million is

allocated for programs to improve the

handling of child abuse cases in Indian

Country.

This year’s planned scope of activities

to benefit crime victims is OVC’s most

comprehensive to date and includes the

office’s first major demonstration

project. Spurred on by the fast

approaching millennium, OVC seeks to

create a blueprint for communities to

build integrated, inclusive

environments where service providers

work together in one location to care for

crime victims. It plans to offer

communities the information, training,

tools, and technical assistance that they

need to create supportive, multidisciplinary facilities designed

especially for victims. Appropriate to

this goal, the theme of the program plan

is ‘‘Victim Services 2000: A Vision for

the 21st Century.’’

Last year, OVC launched several

major programs:

• The National Crime Victims Agenda,

a project to (1) serve as a guide for longterm action to improve victims’ rights

and services in future years, and (2)

update the 1982 President’s Task Force

Report on Victims of Crime by

describing the progress on victims’

issues during the past fourteen years;

• The publication of bulletins

describing promising practices that are

currently used by diverse victim service

providers, including law enforcement,

prosecution, medical, and corrections

personnel;

• Projects to expand the capacity of

the Federal criminal justice system and

Indian Country to respond to crime

victims; and

• The National Victim Assistance

Academy, which offers comprehensive,

cutting edge training presented by

leaders in the field to victim service

providers.

Building on the achievements of past

efforts and guided by extensive input

from its numerous constituent groups,

OVC will fund the following major

FY96 initiatives:

• The completion of the National

Crime Victims Agenda project and the

publication of a long-term action plan

for supporting crime victims;

• Victim Services 2000, a strategy to

support communities in implementing

comprehensive, collaborative services

for all crime victims in a victimcentered environment that integrates

many of the promising practices

identified by FY95 grantees;

• An expanded National Victim

Assistance Academy, simultaneously

conducted at three sites through an

interactive video hook-up, which will

provide intensive education and

training for policy makers and

practitioners, as well as a training of

trainers seminar to build expertise and

promote leadership in the victim

services field;

• The new Training and Technical

Assistance Center, which will funnel

resources to local, State, tribal, and

Federal agencies to strengthen their

capacity to serve crime victims;

• A major effort to improve the

response of communities and the

juvenile justice system to victims of

juvenile offenders and gang violence;

and

• A comprehensive plan to expand

victim-witness training in the Federal

system, including funding of full-time

trainers for U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and

the Federal Bureau of Investigation

(FBI), demonstration projects to improve

services to white-collar crime and bank

robbery victims, and major new

initiatives in Indian Country to improve

the handling of child abuse and

domestic violence cases.

Many programs in OVC’s FY96 plan

grew out of dozens of meetings with

constituent groups around the country

and were developed in partnership with

other agencies. These include other

bureaus in the Office of Justice Programs

(OJP); Department of Justice (DOJ)

offices, including the Executive Office

for U.S. Attorneys, the Violence Against

Women Office, and the Office for Policy

Development; as well as other Federal

agencies. For example, the TRIAD

Program, which is a partnership

between older Americans and law

enforcement personnel to improve

services to elderly crime victims, has

been supported by OVC, the Bureau of
21288 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

Justice Assistance (BJA), and the

Administration on Aging at the

Department of Health and Human

Services. TRIAD was developed by the

American Association of Retired

Persons, the International Association of

Chiefs of Police, and the National

Sheriffs’ Association and has

established over 260 local programs

nationwide.

Among the many other examples of

collaboration is the Attorney General’s

Indian Country Justice Initiative, which

funds comprehensive services for two

Indian tribes. It is a cooperative effort

between the Administrative Office of

the U.S. Courts, the Department of the

Interior, and various DOJ components,

including the Criminal Division, the

Office of Tribal Justice, the Office of

Policy Development, and OVC, as well

as other OJP bureaus.

In this plan, the discretionary

programs are separated into five major

categories: The Vision, Voices from the

Field, Building Vital Capacity in Victim

Services, VOCA Enhancements, and

Victim Assistance in Indian Country.

• The first category—‘‘The Vision’’—

exemplifies the overall theme and

includes the National Crime Victims

Agenda project, the demonstration

initiative Victim Services 2000, and the

National Victim Assistance Academy.

Other programs in this section are

designed to fill gaps in existing services

and gather information on promising

practices that have not yet been

identified and examined.

• Programs included under the

heading ‘‘Voices from the Field’’ offer

resources to fund projects that are

generated from the field and will have

a national impact on improving services

to crime victims. They may include

demonstration projects, training efforts,

and materials such as films, curricula,

brochures, and interactive training

packages.

• The third category—‘‘Building Vital

Capacity in Victim Services’’—includes

other programs designed to expand the

ability of local, State, and Federal

agencies to serve crime victims.

Examples of these programs are the

Trainers Bureau, which provides

national experts to local communities

and agencies, and the Community Crisis

Response Program, which makes teams

of trained crisis responders immediately

available to assist communities in the

wake of major violent incidents.

• Programs under ‘‘VOCA

Enhancements’’ direct discretionary

funds to improve the effectiveness of

State victim compensation and

assistance programs, which receive the

vast majority of Crime Victims Fund

monies each year. A mentoring program

and training conferences are included.

• Finally, ‘‘Victim Assistance in

Indian Country’’ (VAIC) encompasses a

host of programs designed to meet the

needs of tribal communities in working

with crime victims and enhancing

system capacities. One major project

supports over 30 direct service programs

on Indian reservations. Another, the

Children’s Justice Act Discretionary

Grant Program for Native Americans,

makes direct grants to tribes to improve

their response to child abuse cases and

supports the development of related

training materials.

Within each of the five categories,

programs are designated as competitive

or non-competitive. Competitive

programs are those for which OVC is

inviting proposals. Non-competitive

programs include most of the programs

directed to support enhancements of

services to Federal crime victims, many

continuations of current grants,

collaborative efforts in which OVC will

participate but not award a new grant,

and specific programmatic activities

that OVC will conduct internally.

This plan is a summary of the projects

OVC plans to support during the coming

funding cycle. The competitive projects

are open to public and private not-forprofit organizations. Recent legislation

has provided OVC with the authority to

fund demonstration projects, but OVC is

not authorized to support research,

evaluation, or prevention activities.

Most competitive programs, unless

clearly designated for local, State, or

regional purposes, must be national in

scope. Anticipated funding levels,

which are listed for some programs for

FY97 and future years, are not

guaranteed but are contingent upon the

amount of funding that becomes

available in those years for discretionary

purposes.

Application Process

A Program Announcement and

Application Kit, which will be available

beginning May 20, 1996 will serve as a

request for proposals. It will contain

detailed descriptions of competitive

programs and complete forms and

instructions for developing an

application. To receive a Program

Announcement and Application Kit,

please call 202/307–5983 or write to:

Office for Victims of Crime, 1301

Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 200, NW,

Washington, D.C. 20531.

Competitive Programs. The Program

Announcement and Application Kit will

describe for each competitive program:

the purpose of the program, background,

goal, program strategy, eligibility

requirements, award period, award

amount, and application due date.

Application due dates will vary for

different programs. A panel of experts

will be established for most competitive

program areas to review and rank the

applications. Awards will be made to

organizations and agencies offering the

greatest potential for achieving the

programs’ goals on the basis of

information provided in the applicants’

proposals and assessments of past

performance on OVC/OJP grants.

Funding decisions will be made by the

Director of OVC. All applications for

competitive programs are due July 15,

1996 except for the Field Generated/

National Impact Projects and the Action

Partnerships with Professional

Organizations. Applications for these

two projects are due September 1, 1996.

Non-Competitive Programs. OVC staff

will contact applicants for noncompetitive programs to discuss

application requirements and due dates.

Solicitation of Concept Papers. OVC

invites eligible public and private notfor-profit agencies to submit concept

papers for potential funding in FY97.

Agencies submitting outstanding

concept papers will be invited to submit

complete proposals for funding

consideration. Concept papers will be

accepted on two dates: October 1, 1996

and February 1, 1997.

We hope that the following program

plan will generate creative and

comprehensive proposals from diverse

applicants and will nurture improved

and expanded services needed to ensure

justice and healing for all crime victims.

Aileen Adams,

Director, Office for Victims of Crime.

Summary of Competitive Projects

To facilitate applications, competitive

projects which are described in various

places throughout the program plan are

together below:

1. Victim Services 2000 ($200,000 in

FY96 and substantial continuation

of funding in FY97–2000)

2. Victims of Gang Violence ($125,000

in FY96 and in FY97)

3. Juvenile Court Response to Victims of

Juvenile Offenders ($150,000 in

FY96 and in FY97)

4. School Demonstration Projects to

Assist Victims and Witnesses

($200,000 in FY97)

5. Sexual Victimization of Youth

Symposium ($50,000 in FY96)

6. Assisting Disabled Victims of Crime

Symposium ($50,000 in FY96)

7. Victim Assistance for Stalking

Victims ($75,000 in FY96 and in

FY97)

8. Cultural Considerations in Assisting

Victims of Sexual and Physical
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21289

Violence ($75,000 in FY96 and in

FY97)

9. Restitution: Promising Practices

($100,000 in FY96)

10. Sexual Assault Curriculum and

Training Project ($100,000 in FY96

and in FY97)

11. Field Generated National Impact

Projects ($550,000 in FY96 and in

FY97)

12. Concept Papers for FY97 ($600,000

in FY97)

13. State and Regional Conference

Support Initiative ($75,000 in FY96)

14. Innovative Federal Victim and

Witness Practices ($100,000 in

FY96)

15. Capacity Building Technical

Assistance (up to $10,000 per site in

FY96)

16. Action Partnerships with

Professional Organizations

($120,000 in FY97)

17. Resource Materials for Victim

Organizations ($125,000 in FY96)

18. OVC ‘‘Help’’ Series ($30,000 in

FY97)

19. Regional Technical Assistance

Meetings for State VOCA

Administrators ($25,000 in FY97)

20. Children’s Advocacy Centers in

Indian Country ($50,000 in FY96)

21. Topic-Specific Monographs ($75,000

in FY96)

I. The Vision

A. Comprehensive Initiatives

1. The National Crime Victims Agenda

($125,000)—Non-Competitive

The National Crime Victims Agenda

report will be published in 1996. The

report will focus on promising practices

in a variety of disciplines and crime

victim categories, and will encourage

reforms that build on the

recommendations presented in the 1982

Final Report of the President’s Task

Force on Victims of Crime. A funding

priority for OVC in 1997 is to support

programs that implement key

recommendations of the Agenda report.

2. Victim Services 2000 ($200,000 in

FY96 and Substantial Continuation of

Funding in FY97–2000)—Competitive

Victim Services 2000 will support the

development of a comprehensive victim

service system in at least two select

communities—one in an urban setting

and the other in a rural area. The

purpose of this initiative is to support

comprehensive, collaborative services

for all crime victims in a victimcentered environment. Demonstration

sites will involve victim service

practitioners, criminal justice and local

emergency response personnel, support

groups, medical and mental health

providers, clergy, schools, youth, and

youth workers as active participants in

the planning and implementation of

their programs. Sites also will be

encouraged to develop linkages with the

media, professional educators,

legislators and other elected leaders,

community leaders, the private sector,

professional associations, and others to

improve services to victims. The

integration of recently developed

technologies, special service settings,

community-based programs, appropriate

State and local laws, interagency

linkages, and an internal assessment

process will be critical to the success of

these Victim Services 2000 laboratories,

which will function as training sites for

other communities.

The initiative will require three

phases: community planning and model

development, component

implementation, and training and

information dissemination. During the

first phase, sites will conduct a

collaborative needs assessment and

planning process, creating a model for a

comprehensive victim service

environment in their communities and

a detailed plan for implementing the

model. In subsequent years, they will

implement the plan by enhancing

existing services, filling service gaps,

and integrating new promising programs

and strategies into their system of

services. Once the demonstration sites

are fully implemented, they will assume

two additional functions: to serve as a

training laboratory for victim service

personnel from other communities and

to produce information useful to others

wishing to replicate or adapt their

model.

The solicitation for the initiative will

be directed toward communities that

have already made substantial progress

in developing a comprehensive and

coordinated system of victim services.

Applicants are expected to collaborate

with other relevant public and private

agencies that serve crime victims locally

and document these relationships

through written interagency agreements

and commitments to share resources.

First year funding will be in the amount

of $100,000 for each site. Based upon

grantee performance and availability of

future funds, substantial funding for

four subsequent years is anticipated.

3. National Victim Assistance Academy

In 1995, OVC initiated the National

Victim Assistance Academy, the first

course of its kind to train victim

practitioners and policy makers. The

Academy offered basic and advanced

interdisciplinary victim assistance

training to students from across the

country. In 1996, OVC will expand the

effort by weaving cutting edge and

tested training materials into a program

that encourages excellence in leadership

and in daily practice. The Academy will

offer specialized training topics, basic

and advanced instruction, and a train

the trainer series to meet the needs of

victim service providers and criminal

justice personnel at local, tribal, State,

and Federal levels. In addition, OVC

will conduct a program assessment and

then craft a plan for building a

comprehensive, multi-faceted Academy

that coordinates the best adult

education training technologies with

OVC’s resources and current training

programs.

National Victim Assistance Academy

Programs ($207,000)—Non-Competitive.

OVC will provide second year funding

for a five-day national victim assistance

seminar for 120 victim service providers

from the Federal, State, tribal, and local

levels. The seminar will originate from

a university campus located in

Washington, D.C., and the instruction

will be simultaneously broadcast to two

additional campuses—one located in

Kansas and the other in California. Each

site will accommodate 40 students. In

addition, the seminar faculty will

conduct a two and one half day Train

the Trainers program in Washington,

D.C. for 30 victim service professionals

who may serve as future seminar faculty

in OVC or State sponsored victim

service provider courses.

Train the Trainer Seminar Series

($450,000)—Non-Competitive. Another

major component of the Academy is a

train the trainer seminar series. Each

year, several topics are identified for

which there is an evident shortage of

qualified trainers to address the needs of

the field. For FY96, four topics have

been identified to offer in this series:

Hate/Bias Crime, Victim Assistance in

Community Corrections, Responding to

Staff Victimization in Correctional

Agencies, and Death Notification. The

Train the Trainer Seminar Series is

described in greater detail below under

‘‘Building Vital Capacity in Victim

Services, Comprehensive Initiatives.’’

Victim Assistance Training Strategies

($25,000)—Non-Competitive. This

project will assess the various strategies

used by OVC to offer training to the

field, and lay the framework for an

expanded Academy which will include

many of those strategies as Academy

components. This project is described

below under ‘‘Building Vital Capacity in

Victim Services, Non-Competitive

Projects.’’
21290 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

4. Comprehensive Initiative To Improve

Services to Victims of Gang and Other

Juvenile Violence

In FY96, OVC will launch a multifaceted initiative to address the serious

and growing problem of gang violence

and its devastating impact on

individuals and communities. The

initiative includes the following

component projects:

Victims of Gang Violence ($125,000 in

FY96 and in FY97)—Competitive. This

project will develop technical assistance

materials to help victim service

providers better serve victims of gangrelated crime. Due to the fear of

retaliation, revenge, and intimidation

that commonly accompany gang

violence, crime victims or their

survivors are often afraid to exercise

certain basic rights such as appearing in

court, making an impact statement,

pursuing restitution, or participating in

other case events. In addition, these

victims are often blamed for the

violence or dismissed as contributing to

the crime. This project will identify and

document the successful ways agencies

and communities are serving these

victims and their families and describe

practical applications for criminal

justice and victim services staff. A

package of technical assistance

materials will be developed.

Simultaneously, the grantee will work

with the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention’s (OJJDP)

demonstration sites, which are currently

implementing that office’s

Comprehensive Community-Wide

Approach to Gang Prevention,

Intervention, and Suppression Program,

and assist them in developing policies,

procedures, and services that address

the needs of the victims of gang

violence. It is anticipated that this

assistance process will aid the grantee

in developing the technical assistance

package and also provide ample

opportunity for pilot-testing the

materials.

Juvenile Court Response to Victims of

Juvenile

Offenders ($150,000 in FY96 and in FY97)—

Competitive. In 1995, OVC funded three

regional forums to assess the needs of victims

of juvenile offenders and to propose action

steps to address these needs. Although the

recommendations generated by these forums

are not yet available, information learned in

the assessment phase of the project can serve

as a starting point for focusing additional

resources on areas of identified need. One

such area is information and education on

victim-related issues for juvenile court

personnel and probation staff.

The recipient of this grant will

conduct a nationwide survey of

practices and programs of juvenile

courts that address the needs of crime

victims. From information gathered by

the survey and through a general search

for additional promising practices, the

grantee will develop a training and

technical assistance package. The

package should cover such topics as

victims’ legal and procedural rights,

victim impact statements, restitution

orders, and other programs and services

that target victims of juvenile offenders

for services or involve them in the court

process. While the package will be

directed primarily toward an audience

of juvenile court personnel and

probation staff, it also should provide

useful information for victim service

providers who work with victims of

juvenile offenders. A training event will

pilot-test the materials.

In FY97, court jurisdictions will be

invited to submit applications to receive

intensive training and technical

assistance from the grantee. Applicants

with extensive prior experience in

providing judicial education and

training are encouraged to apply for this

grant.

Symposium on Gang Violence

($25,000)—Non-Competitive. Together

with OJJDP, OVC will co-sponsor a oneday meeting of gang violence victims

and victim service providers in

conjunction with a larger conference on

gang violence being held in June 1996.

Participants will explore the strategies

that seem to work in their communities,

the current connections that exist

among organizations serving victims of

gang violence, the value in bringing

these groups together, and the role that

government can play in helping to

reduce gang violence. Funding will

cover expenses for victims of gang

violence and for service providers to

attend a planning session and the gang

violence conference.

School Demonstration Projects to

Assist Victims and Witnesses ($200,000

In FY97)—Competitive. OVC plans to

dedicate $200,000 to support two

demonstration programs located in

schools to assist pre-teen and teenage

victims and witnesses of gang violence

and other juvenile crimes. The purpose

of these projects is to establish

comprehensive programs for these

young victims which can be replicated

in additional communities. To be

eligible for the project, a school should

have or be willing to offer the following

resources: an acceptable course of study

on victim issues, which includes

material on the impact of crime,

presented in part by victims themselves;

training on peer support, crisis

response, and mediation techniques;

individual and group counseling

services; avenues for parental

involvement; liaison with local

advocacy programs to support youth

who must deal with the court system;

and support services for victimized

teachers.

Teleconference for Teachers on Staff

Victimization. In FY97, OVC anticipates

funding a teleconference for teachers on

the topic of staff victimization, that is,

victimization in the school and

elsewhere that occurs as a consequence

of their professional role.

B. Competitive Projects

1. Issue Symposia ($100,000)

OVC will fund two two-day symposia

in the amount of $50,000 each on

important and emerging topics in the

victims field. As a substantive

understanding of each topic is critical to

the success of this program, it is likely

that separate awards will be made to

applicant organizations displaying the

greatest depth of knowledge and

experience in each area. The purpose of

the symposia is to stimulate discussion

on specific victim-related issues and to

generate recommendations and action

plans for addressing the issues

effectively. Between 15 and 20 experts

in a given topic area will be invited to

attend each event. The symposium

facilitator will survey the field for

promising and model practices, relevant

research and/or evaluation findings, and

available statistics, and will provide this

material to participants in advance of

the event. The agenda will include

expert presentations, round-table

discussions, and the development of an

action plan for the field that outlines

specific steps for outreach, training and

technical assistance, and public

education. Specific recommendations

for practitioners also will be generated

where appropriate. For each event, the

facilitator will report on the group’s

findings, recommendations, and action

plan. These highlights will be

summarized in a short monograph

suitable for publication as an OVC

bulletin. The symposia topics are:

Sexual Victimization of Youth.

National-scope studies such as Rape in

America have documented the

prevalence of sexual violence in the

lives of youth. Failure to intervene

during these formative years can lead to

long lasting mental health problems and

vulnerability to further victimization.

Nonetheless, adolescent and preadolescent victims of sexual violence

remain a population underserved by

victim assistance professionals. The

symposium ‘‘Sexual Victimization of

Youth’’ will focus on effective means of

reaching and assisting young victims.

Assisting Disabled Victims of Crime.

Persons with physical and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21291

developmental disabilities face

increased vulnerability to crime

victimization, and at the same time,

remain a population acutely

underserved by victim assistance

providers. Passage of the Americans

with Disabilities Act has heightened the

visibility of the issue and prompted

thought about how service providers

can best extend the reach of their

services to disabled victims. ‘‘Assisting

Disabled Victims of Crime’’ will explore

issues of service accessibility and

appropriateness, as well as legal

considerations arising from the law.

2. Victim Assistance for Stalking

Victims ($75,000 in FY96 and in FY97)

Although almost every State has

passed anti-stalking legislation and

developed a model code, communities

are challenged with enforcing the new

laws. This project will build upon the

model anti-stalking code and

recommendations developed by the

National Criminal Justice Association

under grants from OVC, the National

Institute of Justice (NIJ), and BJA. The

project will support a survey of

promising practices for effectively

managing stalking cases in the criminal

justice system, with particular attention

to protection and support for victims.

The grant recipient will produce a

compendium of promising practices in

States and localities, with an in-depth

focus on the case management systems

implemented at three model sites. The

grantee will examine strategies for

coordination between victim assistance

providers and members of the criminal

justice system, including law

enforcement, prosecutors, and judges.

The grantee also will document

innovative laws and policies, relevant

and reliable case law, and the use of

technology (e.g., special monitoring

equipment) to protect victims. The

grantee’s final compendium will

describe key elements of a model system

response to stalking victims. Grant

activities will cover two years with

$75,000 available in FY96 and an

additional $75,000 available for training

and technical assistance in FY97.

3. Cultural Considerations in Assisting

Victims of Sexual and Physical Violence

($75,000 in FY96 and in FY97)

Female victims of sexual and physical

violence come from many cultural and

ethnic backgrounds. The diversity of

this population presents victim

advocates and criminal justice

professionals with unique challenges in

outreach and service delivery. Language

barriers, cultural stigmas attached to

being sexually victimized or battered,

and lack of awareness of the availability

of services often deprive women and

their children of critical victim

assistance services and criminal justice

protections. This program will train

domestic violence and sexual assault

victim advocates, law enforcement, and

attorneys to be more responsive to the

female victims of diverse cultural and

ethnic backgrounds. A major portion of

the training will be devoted to

implementation of the Violence Against

Women provisions of the Violent Crime

Control and Law Enforcement Act of

1994.

4. Restitution: Promising Practices ($100,000)

Restitution is a direct and positive

way to hold offenders accountable for

the harm caused by their offenses. With

widespread support from many victims

and members of the general public,

restitution has increasingly become

mandatory for offenders in both juvenile

and adult courts at the local, State, and

Federal levels. Yet many jurisdictions

find that orders of restitution are

extremely difficult to enforce. Barriers

to enforcement include inadequate

administrative policies and practices, as

well as the indigence of some offenders.

This project, jointly sponsored by OVC

and BJA, will identify promising

approaches used in the criminal and

juvenile justice systems to establish and

enforce orders of restitution and to

ensure that victims receive the

payments due them. Such approaches

might include the use of efficient,

simple-to-use software programs to track

and manage restitution orders;

procedures for assessing victim losses to

determine appropriate amounts of

restitution to order; and strategies for

collecting restitution payments. The

grantee will produce a compendium of

promising practices and accompanying

training and technical assistance

materials to assist jurisdictions that

wish to implement them. In addition,

limited technical assistance will be

provided to sites seeking to improve

their capacity to carry out court-ordered

restitution.

5. Sexual Assault Curriculum and

Training Project ($100,000 in FY96 and

in FY97)

OVC will fund a three phased project

to develop comprehensive training for

rape crisis counselors and victim

advocates who are responsible for

providing services and securing rights

for adult victims of sexual assault. In

phase one of the project, the grantee will

conduct an extensive literature search

and review and develop a

comprehensive training curriculum and

train the trainer guidebook for program

managers and statewide coalition

leaders. The curriculum will present

effective service delivery strategies,

including crisis counseling, support

groups, criminal justice advocacy,

outreach, and referral services. Since the

curriculum and guidebook will build

upon existing training curricula and

will include standard core elements,

these products can be developed

concurrently with the literature review.

Phase two of the project will focus on

the delivery of training to service

providers and victim advocates at

national, regional, and statewide

training events. In the final phase of the

project, it is anticipated that the grantee

will present the training as part of the

train the trainer component of the OVC

National Victim Assistance Academy. In

addition, the grantee will assess the

training and make recommendations for

modifications and further dissemination

of materials. Highlights of the training

program will be summarized in a short

monograph suitable for publication as

an OVC bulletin. Continuation funding

in FY98 will be considered, depending

upon the success of the project.

C. Non-Competitive Projects

1. Law School Clinics as Resources

Against Family Violence ($25,000)

In collaboration with the Violence

Against Women Grants Office and the

American Bar Association, OVC will

support regional training conferences

focusing on community responses to

family violence. The target audience of

the conference series consists of victim

advocates and law school clinic

personnel. The purpose of the grant is

to encourage law school clinics to

develop or enhance clinical programs

that address family violence issues and

to facilitate a recognition among victim

advocates of law schools as valuable

resources. The grantee will develop a

monograph describing innovative

services for family violence victims

which will be disseminated to law

schools nationwide.

2. Teleconference on Staff Victimization

in Correctional Facilities ($50,000)

A two-hour teleconference on staff

victimization in juvenile and adult

correctional facilities will be conducted

in collaboration with the National

Institute of Corrections (NIC) and OJJDP.

The teleconference, transmitted via

satellite, will allow participants to view

the event ‘‘live’’ on a television or a

large projection screen and ask

questions of the experts by telephone

during the program. OVC, OJJDP, and

NIC staff will jointly plan the

teleconference agenda. They will

competitively contract for both the
21292 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

production of short videotaped

segments to highlight key elements of

the topic and the ‘‘uplink’’ transmission

of the event. Sites will register to serve

as host sites, and each will designate a

contact person to coordinate the

teleconference, duplicate camera-ready

materials for the participants, and

submit participant evaluations to OVC.

3. Domestic Violence Against Women

Technical Assistance Program

Last year, OVC provided seed money

so that customized, multi-disciplinary

training could be provided to

jurisdictions seeking to create a

coordinated response to family violence.

In 1996, OVC will continue to work

with the Violence Against Women

Grants Office to provide

Services*Training*Officers*Prosecutors

(STOP) grantees technical assistance,

including site visits for family violence

teams to observe innovative programs in

operation.

4. Safe Kids/Safe Streets: Community

Based Approaches To Intervening in

Child Abuse and Neglect ($100,000 in

FY97)

OVC will join with other OJP Bureaus

to support the Child Safe Project, which

will coordinate Federal, State, and local

resources into a comprehensive

prevention and intervention program for

child victims and their families. This

OJP-wide program will create systemic

reforms to improve services for abused

children; provide training and technical

assistance support to practitioners who

serve child victims and their families;

strengthen a continuum of family

support services to assure that

assessment, counseling, and victim

assistance services are available; assure

the uniformity of evaluation protocols

across sites; and provide prevention

education and public information. OVC

will provide selected grantees with

training, technical assistance, and

training materials on improving services

for child victims. Assistance will focus

on expanding the availability of medical

services to sexually and physically

abused children and mentoring or

training programs for communities

wishing to establish a Children’s

Advocacy Center. New technologies, use

of specially trained nurse practitioners,

and coordination with facilities that are

providing quality forensic examinations

and other medical services to child

victims are some of the approaches that

will be utilized to improve medical

services for young victims.

5. Child Sexual Exploitation: Improving

Investigations and Protecting Victims

($189,000)

OVC and OJJDP will jointly support

the continuation of a project that has

developed a model for linking criminal

justice personnel across jurisdictional

boundaries and sources of victim

assistance when sexually exploited

children or youth are identified. During

this phase, the grantee will: develop a

‘‘promising practices’’ report to

document varying approaches to multijurisdictional collaboration; organize a

conference, in conjunction with the

1997 National Symposium on Child

Sexual Abuse, to bring together existing

multi-jurisdictional teams; and develop

a videotape and users’ guide to

showcase models for multijurisdictional collaboration.

6. FBI Victim-Witness Programs

($100,000)

OVC will provide up to $100,000 to

support one demonstration victimwitness program in an FBI field office or

resident agency. OVC will work with

the FBI’s Victim-Witness Assistance

Program to announce the availability of

the funding to field agencies. Applicant

sites will submit a proposed

implementation plan and budget. The

selected project will identify,

implement, and document promising

practices for working with crime

victims. Information about the results of

this demonstration program will be

distributed to other FBI field offices for

possible replication. OVC will provide

funding for one year, with a possible

second year renewal.

7. U.S. Attorney Victim-Witness

Program ($150,000)

OVC and BJA will provide joint

second year funding to support a

demonstration victim-witness assistance

program in the Eastern District of

Wisconsin U.S. Attorney’s Office. The

purpose of the program is to improve

the capability of U.S. Attorneys’ Offices

to respond to the rights and needs of

Federal crime victims. Funds provide

for the hiring of a victim-witness

counselor advocate, a community drug

victim specialist, and a victim-witness

paralegal assistant. OVC and the U.S.

Attorney’s Office will compile the

program’s promising practices and

disseminate them to other U.S.

Attorneys— Offices for replication.

8. National Symposium on Child Sexual

Abuse ($37,000)

OVC will support the participation of

teams of Federal criminal justice

personnel nominated by the U.S.

Attorneys’ Offices to attend the National

Symposium on Child Sexual Abuse.

OVC will also sponsor workshops

specific to the unique dynamics

attendant to Federal sexual abuse cases.

9. White-Collar Crime Victim Advocate

Pilot Project ($100,000)

OVC will support a pilot project in

the Northern District of California U.S.

Attorney’s Office to improve services for

white-collar crime victims. The project

will identify, implement, and document

promising practices for working with

white-collar crime victims. Funds will

be used to hire a white-collar crime

victim advocate who will aid in

identifying and recovering assets for

victims. The advocate will work under

the direction of the Chief of the

Economic Crimes Division and will

work closely with other components

including the Asset Forfeiture Division,

criminal investigators, the Financial

Litigation Unit, U.S. Marshals, and the

Victim-Witness Coordinator. Funds will

also provide for computer support and

travel. As part of the project, a

representative of the U.S. Attorney’s

Office will participate in an ad-hoc

working group which will: (1) Identify

and assess materials and practices that

could benefit white-collar crime

victims; (2) produce a resource kit that

includes a victim pamphlet, victim

handbook, and videotape; and (3) create

a Victim-Witness Coordinator guide to

assisting white-collar crime victims.

Information about the results of this

demonstration program will be

distributed to other U.S. Attorneys—

Offices for possible replication.

10. U.S. Parole Commission Interagency

Agreement ($54,000)

Through an interagency agreement

with the U.S. Parole Commission, OVC

will fund a Victim-Witness Coordinator

position to provide services for victims

and witnesses with respect to

attendance at Federal parole revocation

hearings and notification of the results

of those hearings. The Victim-Witness

Coordinator also will coordinate with

the Federal Bureau of Prisons when

offenders are returned to prison to

ensure that victims of the original

Federal offenses are notified of the

offenders’ return to prison, any

subsequent parole considerations, and

the offenders’ eventual release. At the

end of the first year of this project, the

Parole Commission will conduct an

evaluation of the effort, including a

review of case files for victim and

witness appearance rates, and will

survey victims, witnesses, and parole

staff through questionnaires or phone

interviews. The results of this review

and survey may provide information
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21293

that can be used in State systems. The

project might also document promising

practices for Federal cases in which

post-release supervision is provided by

United States Probation Officers and in

revocation proceedings conducted by

the Federal Courts.

11. Children’s Advocacy Center Pilot

Project ($95,000)

Through funds provided to the U.S.

Attorney’s Office in the District of

Columbia, OVC will support the

establishment of a Children’s Advocacy

Center demonstration site for Federal

prosecutors and other agencies. The

Center will showcase interagency

services in a child-oriented

environment. The multi-disciplinary

Center will reduce the trauma to

children by implementing a joint

interview/assessment process among

key agencies, thus minimizing the

number of interviews. Program

materials such as forms, letters,

memoranda of agreement, policies,

procedures, brochures, and

informational materials for child victims

and their families will be compiled and

shared with other sites wishing to

replicate or develop similar services for

child victims.

12. International Victim Assistance

Summit ($15,000)

OVC will provide funding to assist the

National Organization for Victim

Assistance in organizing and

implementing a summit on international

victim assistance issues involving

expert leaders from around the world.

II. Voices From the Field

A. Comprehensive Initiatives

1. Field Generated National Impact

Projects ($550,000 in FY96 and in

FY97)—Competitive

This program is designed to give the

field wide latitude in making proposals

to improve practices and enhance crime

victims’ access to rights and services.

OVC invites the submission of proposals

for training and technical assistance

projects that: (1) Address an area of

ongoing or emerging need; (2) are

national in scope or will have a national

impact; and (3) will provide products or

materials that may be easily adapted,

replicated, and disseminated to

practitioners in the field. Proposals

must be congruent with OVC’s

discretionary funding authority to

support demonstration, training, and

technical assistance projects that

improve the response to and services for

crime victims. Activities outside the

scope of OVC’s funding authority

include prevention, treatment for

perpetrators, research, evaluation, and

other activities not directly linked to

assisting crime victims. Proposed

projects may range from $50,000 to

$100,000. Consideration will be given to

projects that warrant multi-year funding

based on project design. However, each

phase should be capable of standing

alone. Examples of the kinds of

activities that can be supported include,

but are not limited to:

• One to two day symposia on

promising practices in a given topic

area. Products will include an inventory

of practices and programs; a list of

expert trainers/practitioners; and

symposia proceedings, and suggested

strategies for action.

• Training programs for trainers and

practitioners in a given program area.

Train the trainer programs using

existing and demonstrated successful

curricula as well as the development of

new training materials are encouraged.

Products will include a survey of

promising practices for new programs or

an update of the curricula for existing

programs; development and pilot-testing

of training curricula and participant

manuals; and plans to train with or

directly disseminate the training

products.

• Compendia of promising practices

and program guidelines. Products will

include a survey of the field; inventory

and identification of promising

approaches; identification of core

programmatic elements and

development of model programs or

practices briefs; and publication of a

short bulletin.

• Training videotapes with

instructional booklets, for use by a

trainer or as stand-alone training aids.

• Innovative applications of

technology, such as interactive

computerized training materials, or

instruction and guidance in using other

emerging technologies to inform, assist,

or improve services to crime victims.

• Demonstration projects built on

existing innovative programs that can

serve as learning laboratories or

production of information that enables

others to replicate promising policies,

practices, or entire programs.

Examples of topics might include, but

are not limited to: victim notification

systems; training programs for judges,

prosecutors, and law enforcement

officers; train the trainer programs using

curricula which have been

demonstrated to be successful; victim

assistance programs tailored to meet the

unique needs of campus, white-collar

crime, and bank robbery victims; and

assistance practices that are responsive

to ‘‘hidden’’ or underserved victim

populations.

Applicants for train the trainer

projects must include the curriculum

they intend to use. Proposals involving

collaboration between public, not-forprofit, and private sector organizations

are encouraged.

OVC also is seeking to stimulate a

response to crime victims from diverse

fields such as the religious community,

private non-profit agencies that link

with the corporate community to

address victim issues (such as

workplace violence), and partnerships

between organizations that result in

expanded services for crime victims. In

order to draw diverse skill, experience,

and knowledge from the range of

organizations that address crime victim

issues, no more than two proposals or

more than $150,000 will be considered

for award to any single victim

organization in a single year.

B. Competitive Programs

1. Solicitation of Concept Papers for

FY97 ($600,000)

Innovative Training, Technical

Assistance and Demonstration Projects

In FY96, OVC anticipates funding five

or six of the highest ranking

applications submitted under ‘‘Field

Generated National Impact Projects,’’

which is described above. OVC is also

inviting the submission of concept

papers on victim-related topics. OVC

will review and rank the papers, and

invite the highest ranking applicants to

submit full proposals for FY97 funding

consideration. Concept papers will

enable OVC to explore new ideas

without burdening prospective

applicants, and also permit OVC to

project more accurately the nature and

amount of future grant awards. To be

considered for funding, concept papers

must address program areas within

OVC’s funding authority. Please see

‘‘Field Generated National Impact

Projects’’ above. The examples

provided, which illustrate permissible

activities, are not intended to limit

innovative ideas or approaches; the

examples should not be construed as the

only areas of interest or topics that will

be funded. OVC’s Program

Announcement and Application Kit will

give further guidance on preparing and

submitting concept papers, which are

due October 1, 1996 or February 1, 1997

for two cycles of review and funding.

Special Focus: Assisting the Victims of

Crime in the Adjudicative and

Administrative Aspects of Criminal,

Civil, and Tribal Courts

OVC recognizes the central role courts

play in ensuring the delivery of justice,

enhancing victims’ perceptions that
21294 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

justice has been done, and improving

their sense of safety and redress. In

recent years, court personnel—judges,

court administrators, and clerks of

court—have increasingly developed

innovative strategies for assisting the

victims of crime in both adjudicative

and administrative aspects of criminal,

civil, tribal, and juvenile courts. OVC

seeks concept papers from courts, courtrelated organizations, and other

agencies with relevant expertise to

support activities that enhance or

demonstrate innovations in courts’

responses to and activities with victims

of crime, and that can be replicated in

other jurisdictions. Such court activities

can involve, but are not limited to: (1)

The development and delivery of

education and training or curricula

development for court personnel, victim

advocates, and victims, with particular

emphasis on increasing coordination

with the prosecutor and other

components of the criminal justice

system; (2) activities to improve victims’

access to justice, including the access of

those proceeding pro se in related civil/

domestic relations matters; (3)

diagnostic services and referrals to

appropriate community services; (4)

programs to increase the safety of

victims and witnesses in cases of

stalking, threats, and intimidation and

to reduce their exposure to the offender

and the offender’s supporters

throughout the trial period; and (5)

programs that ensure victims are kept

informed of, prepared for, and have the

opportunity to be heard at the various

stages of the court process. Other issues

of particular interest that proposed

projects might address are: the impact of

the media in high profile cases; gaining

acceptance and understanding of the

role of victim advocates in the judicial

system; and procedures that limit the

trauma of testimony by making

accommodations to victims with special

needs, such as children and the

disabled.

2. State and Regional Conference

Support Initiative ($75,000)

In FY96, OVC will continue its

successful Conference Support Training

Initiative. This comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to training has

provided an opportunity for nearly

10,000 victim assistance providers,

crime victims, law enforcement

officials, prosecutors, and allied

professionals to attend cost-effective

State, regional, and national victim

assistance conferences. Over the past

three years, OVC has co-sponsored 35

State and regional victim assistance

conferences, as well as tracks of victim

assistance training at four national

conferences of allied professions.

Through this initiative, OVC will

continue to fund State and regional

training events. Priority funding

consideration will be given to States

that have not previously participated in

this project. A portion of the training

workshops must be devoted to Federal

crime victim issues. These issues may

include bank robbery, bias/hate crimes,

white-collar crime, and crimes

occurring on Federal lands or in Indian

Country.

3. Innovative Federal Victim and

Witness Practices ($100,000)

OVC will entertain proposals for

identifying promising practices in

addressing Federal victim and witnessrelated issues.

C. Non-Competitive Projects

1. Federal Crime Victim Assistance

Fund ($75,000)

Through an interagency agreement

with the Executive Office of U.S.

Attorneys, OVC will provide financial

assistance to victims of Federal crime

when other resources are not available.

OVC will respond to requests from

individual U.S. Attorneys’ Offices for

assistance in meeting the direct and

immediate needs of Federal crime

victims.

2. District Specific Training ($80,000)

OVC will provide funding to Federal

Districts to support training conferences

and seminars addressing Federal

victims’ rights issues and compliance

with the Attorney General Guidelines

for Victim and Witness Assistance. The

purpose of this program is to allow U.S.

Attorneys’ Offices to sponsor training

events that meet local or regional needs.

3. Oklahoma City Federal Victim

Assistance Program ($100,000 in FY96

and in FY97)

Through an interagency agreement

with the Executive Office of U.S.

Attorneys, OVC will make funding

available to aid victims of the Alfred P.

Murrah Federal building bombing. OVC

will respond to requests from the U.S.

Attorney’s Office in the Western District

of Oklahoma for financial assistance to

support transportation to the trial in

Denver, Colorado, for temporary shelter,

and for crisis counseling. OVC will

make an additional $100,000 available

for this program in FY97.

III. Building Vital Capacity in Victim

Services

A. Comprehensive Initiatives

1. OVC Resource Center ($350,000)—

Non-Competitive

The OVC Resource Center is a

national clearinghouse of information

concerning victim and witness

assistance programs, victim

compensation programs, and

organizations from the private sector

that assist victims and witnesses. It

serves a broad constituency of

individuals and organizations with

professional, academic, and advocacyrelated interests in the welfare of crime

victims, including victim service

providers, law enforcement agencies,

clergy, prosecutors, health care

practitioners, legislators, researchers,

and victims. Key projects anticipated

during FY96 include the establishment

and distribution of an OVC newsletter,

the development of new Internet/World

Wide Web-based resources, and

extensive conference activity. This

initiative is supported jointly by OVC

and BJA.

2. Training and Technical Assistance

Center

In recent years, OVC has developed

several new mechanisms to direct

training and technical assistance toward

building the capacities of victim service

agencies, frequently in response to

requests from individual agencies for

help in dealing with specific topics or

problems. The OVC Training and

Technical Assistance Center will offer a

centralized access point for information

about OVC’s training and technical

assistance resources. It will develop and

disseminate training and technical

assistance materials on topics of interest

to the field, and mobilize specialized

teams to address these topics and other

identified areas of need. The Center also

will assess and evaluate the training and

technical assistance provided by Center

components to ensure that high

standards of quality are maintained.

During FY96, OVC will publish a

Request for Proposal (RFP) to contract

services for FY97–2000.

The Training and Technical

Assistance Center will include:

Capacity Building Technical

Assistance—Competitive. OVC is

launching a technical assistance

program designed to strengthen

community-based statewide and

national victim assistance organizations,

coalitions, and support groups. There

are currently over 8,000 local victim

service programs, hundreds of statewide

coalitions, and nearly a dozen national
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21295

victim organizations that have worked

to make the criminal justice and social

service systems more responsive to the

needs and rights of crime victims.

Although their accomplishments have

been impressive, many grassroots,

volunteer-powered agencies need

organizational development assistance

in order to ensure their continuation

and nurture future growth. Through this

program, such agencies may request the

assistance of an expert or team of

experts who can assess their current

operations and advise them on

strengthening their organizational

structure and funding base, suggest

strategies for networking and outreach,

support their capacity to seed new

chapters or services, and provide

leadership and board development

training. Interested organizations may

apply to OVC for Capacity Building

Technical Assistance, following

application guidelines which will be

described in the Program

Announcement and Application Kit.

The five top-ranking applicants will

receive up to $10,000 in intensive,

individualized technical assistance.

This project will be coordinated with

OVC’s organizational development

resource kit described below under the

heading, ‘‘Resource Materials for Victim

Organizations.’’

Trainers Bureau ($165,000 in FY96)—

Non-Competitive. The Trainers Bureau

is a mechanism for supporting costeffective training and technical

assistance to victim assistance programs

and other agencies that deal with crime

victims. Since its creation in 1994, the

program has responded to more than 80

requests for a broad range of assistance.

During FY96, OVC will publish a

Request for Proposal (RFP) to contract

services for FY97–2000. It is anticipated

that this program will continue without

interruption, and public and private

not-for-profit agencies can continue to

request assistance by contacting OVC for

application instructions. BJA is

collaborating with OVC in supporting

this program.

The Trainer’s Bureau also will

support a conference for OVC’s

discretionary grantees that provides

information on the best strategies for

developing and conducting effective

training events, incorporates new

technologies, involves OVC grantees in

summarizing their projects and

accomplishments, and focuses on OVC

staff and grantee reciprocal

responsibilities. The purpose is to share

information about all projects, promote

networking, and provide a forum to

discuss future activities that will

improve the quality of OVC training and

technical assistance products and

services.

Community Crisis Response (CCR)

($25,000)—Non-Competitive. Through

CCR, which was formerly called

Immediate Response to Emerging Issues

(IREP), OVC will continue to provide

rapid response to requests for

emergency training or technical

assistance from communities and

Federal, State, and local agencies

responding to a major crisis involving

multiple victims. Communities and

agencies can continue to request

assistance by contacting OVC for

application instructions.

Victim Assistance Partnerships and

Strategies for the 1996 Olympics—NonCompetitive. OVC will provide support

to public and private partnerships in

Atlanta, Georgia and surrounding

communities to assist them in

addressing the increased and special

needs of people victimized during the

1996 Olympic Games. The designated

lead local agency will convene a

planning committee of Federal, State,

and local officials and victim advocates

to develop a crisis response plan and

protocols and to facilitate memoranda of

understanding among the relevant

agencies to carry out the plan.

Conference and Meeting Support

($80,000)—Non-Competitive. This

program will support logistics,

planning, and travel-related costs for

OVC-sponsored conferences and

meetings. These events are likely to

include:

• Focus groups that highlight major

emerging issues. One topic OVC

anticipates exploring through a focus

group is victim assistance from the

religious community. Since many

victims and survivors seek counsel and

support from their religious leaders,

members of the clergy have a

tremendous potential to assist crime

victims. This focus group will recruit

participants from the widest possible

diversity of religious training

institutions. A project advisory

committee will be identified from staff

of seminaries, bible colleges, rabbinical

schools, and clerical training

institutions, as well as from religious

leaders who are involved in victim

issues and victim advocates. Additional

focus groups on other topics also may be

convened.

• Meetings with OVC’s various

constituent groups, including State

VOCA grantees.

• Support for Regional Coordination

Initiative activities.

• Funding for unanticipated

conferences and events that OVC may

wish to conduct in the course of the

year.

3. Regional Coordination Initiative—

Non-Competitive

This initiative is designed to promote

networking and collaboration among

victim service professionals on a

regional basis. It mobilizes teams of

Regional Field Coordinators (RFCs),

selected from experienced victim

service providers, to develop and

implement regional training and

technical assistance projects on victims

issues. Each of four regional teams plans

and organizes a training or technical

assistance activity that their group will

sponsor during the year. Activities are

selected based upon input gathered

from victim service providers and allied

professionals throughout each region.

Funding for team activities will be

provided through the Training and

Technical Assistance Center.

4. Train the Trainer Seminar Series

($450,000)—Non-Competitive

Hate/Bias Crime ($150,000 in FY96 and

in FY97)

Victim Assistance in Community

Corrections ($100,000)

Responding to Staff Victimization in

Correctional Agencies ($100,000)

Death Notification ($100,000)

OVC will sponsor a series of training

for trainers seminars using curricula on

topics of special interest that have

already been developed through

previous OVC grants. Between two and

four seminars will be offered on each

topic.

Using the curricula they have already

developed, pilot-tested, and delivered,

the Education Development Center will

offer training on Hate/Bias Crime; the

American Probation and Parole

Association will present seminars on

Victim Assistance in Community

Corrections; the National Victim Center

will offer training on Responding to

Staff Victimization in Correctional

Agencies; and Mothers Against Drunk

Driving will provide seminars on Death

Notification. Respective grantees will:

(1) Update the existing training package

to produce comprehensive and userfriendly instructor and participant

training manuals; (2) develop a plan for

recruiting ‘‘strategically placed’’

individuals and supporting their

attendance through scholarships at a

training seminar; (3) produce a plan and

instruments for assessing the impact of

the training; (4) conduct train the trainer

seminars; and (5) prepare a final report

that presents the project assessment and

makes recommendations for further

improvements or training.

Since the focus of the project is to

integrate the training information into

policies and procedures, the recruitment
21296 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

process is crucial to the project’s

success. Grantees should therefore

present a plan to attract certified

trainers or individuals who are

strategically located within a national,

State, or local training academy or other

system. Participating trainees must

commit to disseminating the

information through in-service training

in their organizations, at State or local

training academies, or via other means

that channel the information to allied

professionals in community, State, or

national arenas.

5. TRIAD/Elder Abuse ($50,000 in FY96

and $200,000 in FY97)—NonCompetitive

In 1994, OVC entered into a

partnership with BJA and the

Administration on Aging at the

Department of Health and Human

Services to support regional TRIAD

conferences. These training conferences

have stimulated the growth of over 260

TRIAD programs in 44 States around the

country. TRIAD is a joint effort of the

American Association of Retired

Persons, International Association of

Chiefs of Police, and National Sheriffs’

Association to build a coordinated

service response to elderly crime

victims. This successful training will be

continued in FY96 and FY97.

6. Reproduction and Distribution of

Training Materials for Federal Personnel

($80,000)—Non-Competitive

OVC will set aside funding for the

reproduction and dissemination of

various training manuals and

informational materials, including

monographs, videos, and the Attorney

General Guidelines for Victim and

Witness Assistance.

7. Automated Victim Assistance CaseTracking/Notification System

($100,000)—Non-Competitive

OVC will support the development,

testing, and use of a specialized

computer program that tracks victim,

defendant, case, and service agency

information. The system would be

designed to: send victims timely

notification of case proceedings and

dispositions; provide victim service

referrals; generate victim-related

statistics; and ensure compliance with

the Attorney General Guidelines for

Victim and Witness Assistance. OVC

will reimburse the Executive Office of

U.S. Attorneys for expenses incurred by

their Management Information Systems

and/or by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices.

B. Competitive Programs

1. Action Partnerships With

Professional Organizations ($120,000 in

FY97—Amounts up to $15,000 per

Grant Will Be Awarded Depending on

the Activities Pursued by Applicant

Organizations)

OVC seeks to join with national

professional and membership

organizations to support projects that

provide information and training to

their membership for the purpose of

improving their response to crime

victims. OVC is seeking proposals that

specify techniques by which applicant

organizations will disseminate the

information to their membership and

encourage its understanding, use, and

integration into the daily practice of

those who work with crime victims.

Organizations of medical, mental health,

legal, and criminal justice personnel, as

well as the clergy and other allied

professionals, are invited to propose one

or more of the following activities: (1)

Training tracks or a series of workshops

at national conferences; (2) and sharing

information through periodicals, special

monographs or descriptions of model

practices, ‘‘codes of ethics,’’

membership mailings, teleconferences,

videotapes, new communication

technologies, and other avenues for

reaching the range of professionals who

assist crime victims. OVC is particularly

interested in projects that result not

only in information dissemination but

in increased interaction between the

membership of two or more groups.

This project is a new component of

OVC’s Training and Technical

Assistance Center.

2. Resource Materials for Victim

Organizations ($125,000)

This project will support the

development of a training and resource

kit designed to strengthen communitybased statewide and national victim

organizations, coalitions, and support

groups. Family members of homicide

victims and survivors of other violent

crimes often turn to self-help

organizations for critical and long-term

support services, including peer

support, criminal justice advocacy, and

referrals. Self-help groups, typically

staffed primarily or even solely by

volunteers—many of whom are

survivors—have continual and pressing

needs for training and technical

assistance on a variety of topics.

The resource kit will be used to

provide training and technical

assistance that strengthens communitybased statewide and national victim

assistance organizations, coalitions, and

support groups. The kit will cover such

topics as: advocacy within the criminal

and juvenile justice systems; working in

the legislative, political, and media

arenas; fund-raising and management

techniques for volunteer organizations;

strategies for networking; ways to

strengthen organizational structure;

techniques for leadership and board

development; and outreach to

underserved and minority populations.

The grantee will identify an advisory

committee of representatives of the

major support groups for family

members of homicide victims and

survivors of other violent crimes, who

will help shape the contents of the kit.

The materials will be pilot-tested in

several different settings. After they

have been revised, they will be printed

and disseminated to groups nationwide.

OVC anticipates funding a second phase

of this project which will provide

funding to several support groups to use

the training and resource kit with paid

and volunteer staff members.

3. OVC ‘‘Help’’ Series ($30,000 in FY97)

OVC will fund the development of a

packet of crime-specific brochures that

succinctly capture the best known

information on a variety of crime-related

topics and identify national resources

and 800 numbers. The packet will

complement the OVC Resource Center

display; accompany responses to

victims’ letters, as appropriate; and

serve as general public awareness

material. Individual brochures will

address the topics of sexual assault,

domestic violence, stalking, drunk

driving, and child abuse, with an

edition specially tailored for children

(ages 6–11 and 12–16 years).

C. Non-Competitive Projects

1. Regional Seminars for Establishing

Community and Institutional Crisis

Response Teams ($100,000 in FY97)

OVC will provide continuation

funding to organize, conduct, and assess

a series of three regional training

seminars on establishing community

and institutional crisis response teams.

The regional training will assist

participants in preparing a community

or institutional crisis response plan that

is flexible enough to appropriately

address many possible crime-related

crises. The plan must address both

chronic crises, such as multiple

victimizations on one college campus,

and acute crises, such as hostage

situations. The training also will assist

in identifying key professionals to serve

on the crisis response team.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21297

2. Victim Assistance Training Strategies

($25,000)

As presented in 1995, the National

Victim Assistance Academy consisted of

a one week (40 hour), intensive block of

training provided to approximately 40

victim service providers. In an effort to

ensure that OVC is pursuing the most

effective approach to building a training

academy, this project will assess the

basic elements of an effective academy,

including: relevant target population,

training practices and methodologies,

technological pathways, and the relation

of the academy to existing or potential

State and national accreditation

processes for victim service personnel.

Options in all of these areas will be

examined, as well as their respective

cost implications. With input from OVC

on the office’s current training priorities

and issues related to content, training

sites, and number of participants, a

recommendation report will be

produced that can guide the process of

building a multi-faceted Victim

Assistance Academy that will enhance

the quality of victim services in future

years.

3. Resources for National Crime Victims

Rights Week, 1997 ($30,000)

Each year since 1982, National Crime

Victims Rights Week (NCVRW) has been

formally designated and commemorated

at the Federal level during the month of

April. NCVRW provides the nation the

opportunity to acknowledge the plight

of crime victims and to recognize the

numerous reforms that have been

instituted to advance their rights and

respond to their unique needs. This

project will support collaborative efforts

between OVC and victim service

organizations to make materials

available to victims service providers,

advocates, elected leaders, and the

general public to assist in the

commemoration of the national event.

4. Children’s Advocacy Center

Mentoring Program ($50,000)

Children’s Advocacy Centers (CAC)

are assisting communities across the

country in improving the handling of

child victim cases by creating special

child-friendly environments, adjusting

criminal justice procedures to the needs

and abilities of children, and adopting

multi-disciplinary approaches. In FY95,

OVC joined with OJJDP and the

National Children’s Advocacy Network

to produce a video illustrating ‘‘best

medical practices’’ for medical

examinations; to conduct a conference

to facilitate shared resources between

CACs and family violence programs;

and to support a specialized training

track on family violence at the National

Symposium on Child Sexual Abuse. In

FY96, OVC will continue this joint

effort with OJJDP by supporting a

mentoring program that enables

communities to connect with existing

CACs and receive ongoing assistance in

establishing or improving CACs or

multi-disciplinary teams in their own

communities.

5. Battered Women’s Justice Project

($90,000)

In FY95, OVC funded the Battered

Women’s Justice Project to analyze the

Full-Faith and Credit provisions of the

Violence Against Women Act and

provide: (1) An in-depth State-by-State

analysis of enforcement efforts; and (2)

training and technical support for State

and Federal prosecutors to implement

these provisions. OVC is working

closely with the Violence Against

Women Office and the Violence Against

Women Grants Office on this program

and plans to continue this jointly

funded effort in FY96.

6. Domestic Violence In Kentucky:

Model Law Enforcement Response

($20,000)

OVC has worked closely with the

Community Oriented Policing Services

Office (COPS) and the Violence Against

Women Grants Office to establish a

demonstration program in Kentucky to

implement the Full-Faith and Credit

provisions of the Violence Against

Women Act. This program is both an

intra-state and inter-state enforcement

effort.

7. Office of Legal Education Victim

Rights and Legal Issues Instructor

($100,000)

OVC will support an attorney

instructor who will draft litigation series

chapters and course material and

present classroom instruction on

Federal victims’ rights legislation, case

law and policy, and prosecutors’ duties

and responsibilities to Federal crime

victims. OVC will make funding

available through an interagency

agreement with the Executive Office of

U.S. Attorneys.

8. Federal Prosecutor and VictimWitness Coordinator Travel ($200,000)

OVC will provide funding to allow

victim-witness coordinators and

prosecutors from U.S. Attorneys’ Offices

to attend various training conferences.

These funds, to be made available

through an interagency agreement with

the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys,

will cover travel-related expenses.

9. Federal Law Enforcement Training

Center ($125,000)

OVC will continue to support victim

assistance training to law enforcement

officers from over 70 Federal agencies.

This agreement will provide funding for

a trainer to present both basic and

advanced courses at the Federal Law

Enforcement Training Center.

10. FBI Agreement ($273,000)

Through an interagency agreement

with the FBI, OVC will support skill

development training of Victim-Witness

Coordinators at the investigative level.

The agreement will provide for training

for FBI Victim-Witness Coordinators

and fund a full-time trainer at the FBI

Academy.

11. Federal Interagency Agreements

($100,000)

OVC will make funding available to

various Federal agencies to enhance

their capacities for responding to victim

and witness needs. OVC will use funds

to support requests for training or

production and distribution of

informational materials.

12. Federal Travel ($130,000)

OVC will provide funding to allow

non-U.S. Attorney Federal criminal

justice personnel to both attend and

train at OVC-sponsored training

sessions.

13. Developing and Marketing of

Products ($50,000 in FY96 and $110,000

in FY97)

OVC is developing a minimum of 35

monographs and publications to

disseminate descriptions of promising

practices, that is, innovative and

outstanding service strategies and

programs that address the needs of

crime victims. In addition, OVC will

update the civil legal remedies bulletin,

which informs victims of ways to

pursue recovery and justice through

civil procedures. The updated version

will address current State laws and

improved procedures and practices.

Other products that will be reproduced

and disseminated include the National

Bias Crimes Training Guides, elder

abuse training materials, and a

guidebook for communities on

responding to sexual abuse.

IV. VOCA Enhancements

A. Non-Competitive Programs

1. National Technical Assistance

Conference for State VOCA Victim

Compensation and Victim Assistance

Administrators ($100,000)

In FY96, OVC will provide funding to

expand and enhance its support of
21298 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices

national-scope training and technical

assistance for State VOCA victim

compensation and assistance

administrators. Grant awards will be

made to the National Organization for

Victim Assistance (NOVA) and the

National Association of Crime Victim

Compensation Boards (NACVCB) jointly

to plan and conduct a national training

and technical assistance meeting. The

meeting will bring VOCA victim

compensation and assistance

administrators together to receive

guidance and technical assistance to

advance their administration of the

Federal VOCA grant programs. The

grantees will work together to develop

the conference agenda, identify

presenters, and manage other

conference activities. A major purpose

of the grant is to foster ongoing

collaboration and coordination among

compensation and assistance programs.

Compensation and assistance

administrators throughout the country

will be consulted by the grantees

concerning conference dates, presenters,

and agenda.

2. Mentor Program for State VOCA

Victim Compensation and Assistance

Programs ($50,000)

OVC will continue support for a

newly established mentoring program to

provide for on-site, expert assistance for

State VOCA victim compensation and

assistance programs. Participating

‘‘mentors’’ are drawn from a pool of

VOCA administrators who have

demonstrated proficiency in a range of

program management and operational

areas. Technical assistance is

customized to meet the specific needs of

VOCA victim compensation and

assistance administrators. OVC will

make $50,000 available to continue in

this effort. Approved on-site assistance

will be short-term, generally lasting

between one and three days.

B. Competitive Program

1. Regional Technical Assistance

Meetings for State VOCA

Administrators ($25,000 in FY97)

In FY97, OVC will continue to

support regional training and technical

assistance meetings for State VOCA

compensation and assistance

administrators. The purpose of this

initiative is to fund a number of regional

State VOCA administrators’ meetings to

address training and information needs.

These meetings may focus exclusively

on victim assistance or victim

compensation, or on a combination of

the two. Federal funds will be used to

support coordination, materials,

meeting space, consultants, and other

costs associated with planning,

delivering, and assessing each meeting.

V. Victim Assistance in Indian Country

A. Comprehensive Initiatives

1. Victim Assistance in Indian Country

Promising Practices ($25,000)—NonCompetitive

OVC will provide funding to the

National Institute of Justice to assess the

efficacy of VAIC programs.

B. Competitive Programs

1. Children’s Advocacy Centers in

Indian Country ($50,000)

OVC will provide funding to assist

two tribes in establishing Children’s

Advocacy Centers to serve as

demonstration sites. In creating childfocused, multi-disciplinary settings, the

centers will allow for a coordinated

strategy to meet the needs of child

victims and the criminal justice system.

OVC will make funding available

through OJJDP under a cooperative

agreement with regional Children’s

Advocacy Centers.

2. Topic-Specific Monographs ($75,000)

OVC will make funds available for the

development of bulletins, fact sheets,

and monographs on issues relevant to

Native American child victims. Topics

will include jurisdictional issues, child

interviewing techniques, reporting

procedures, child protection teams,

psychological evaluations, cultural

sensitivity, and tribal-Federal

coordination.

C. Non-Competitive Programs

1. Victim Assistance in Indian Country

($767,000)

OVC will make funding available to

18 States to support on-reservation

victim assistance programs in Indian

country. OVC currently funds 32 such

programs, enabling tribal communities

under Federal jurisdiction to establish

domestic violence shelters, crisis

counseling programs, court advocacy

networks, and other victim services.

2. Children’s Justice Act Discretionary

Grant Program for Native Americans

($717,000)

OVC will provide third year funding

to continue projects designed to

improve the investigation and

prosecution of child physical and sexual

abuse cases in tribal communities. The

programs have helped to establish

special tribal child abuse prosecution

units, develop interdisciplinary child

abuse protocols, revise tribal legal

codes, sponsor training, and support a

variety of other initiatives designed to

aid in the handling of child abuse cases.

3. Training and Technical Assistance for

Children’s Justice Act Grantees

($200,000)

OVC will award continued funding to

the National Indian Justice Center (NIJC)

to provide training and technical

assistance to tribes and tribal

organizations in improving the handling

of child physical and sexual abuse

cases. NIJC will assess the needs of new

Children’s Justice Act grantees; develop

plans to meet those needs; provide onsite and telephonic technical assistance

to both new and continuation grantees;

and produce a monograph which

describes promising practices that have

been implemented to assist child

victims in Indian Country.

4. Tribal Court Appointed Special

Advocate Programs ($50,000)

OVC will support the continuation of

Court Appointed Special Advocate

(CASA) programs in Indian Country.

The programs will enable tribal court

systems to assign advocates to represent

the best interests of Native American

children. Funding will be made

available through OJJDP under a

cooperative agreement with the National

CASA Association.

5. Attorney General’s Indian Country

Justice Initiative ($273,000)

OVC will make funding available to

support the Attorney General’s Indian

Country Justice Initiative at the Pueblo

of Laguna in New Mexico and the

Northern Cheyenne Tribe in Montana.

This interagency initiative, which funds

comprehensive services for two Indian

tribes, is a collaborative effort between

the Administrative Office of the U.S.

Courts, the Department of the Interior,

and various DOJ components, including

the Criminal Division, the Office of

Tribal Justice, the Office of Policy

Development, and OVC, as well as other

OJP bureaus. OVC will support

Children’s Justice Act and CASA

projects, as well as victim-witness

programs, at each site. OVC will work

closely with the DOJ Criminal Division

to implement these projects.

6. Tribal and Federal Judges Training

($50,000)

Through an interagency agreement

with the Federal Judicial Center and

DOJ’s Office of Policy Development,

OVC will support a program to educate

tribal and Federal judges on the

handling of child sexual abuse cases in

Indian country. The program will

provide legal education on Federal

procedural law involving the Federal
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 91 / Thursday, May 9, 1996 / Notices 21299

Rules of Evidence, the Federal Rules of

Criminal Procedures, and the Major

Crimes Act; issues of prosecutorial

discretion; and relevant tribal law

regarding child sexual abuse. Funding

also will support the development of a

program manual for tribal and Federal

judges.

[FR Doc. 96–11485 Filed 5–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P