Notices regarding the solicitation “Research and Evaluation for the 

Testing and Interpretation of Physical Evidence in Publicly Funded 

Forensic Laboratories”

January 25, 2017: A recorded webinar has been posted. To assist applicants in completing their 

proposals, NIJ held a webinar related to this solicitation. The recording of the webinar has been 

posted at https://nij.gov/multimedia/Pages/video-fy17-funding-opportunities-for-publicly-fundedcrime-labs-webinar.aspx. 

The original solicitation document begins on the next page.
U.S. Department of Justice OMB No. 1121-0329 

Office of Justice Programs Approval Expires 12/31/2018 

National Institute of Justice 

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), National Institute of 

Justice (NIJ) is seeking applications for research and evaluation studies to produce practical 

knowledge that has the potential to improve the examination and interpretation of physical 

evidence in forensic science laboratories. This program furthers the Department’s mission by 

sponsoring research to provide objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to 

meet the challenges of criminal justice, particularly at the State and local levels. NIJ’s Forensic 

Science Technology Working Group (TWG) assists in identifying and prioritizing operational 

needs and requirements of the field. The forensic science operational needs discussed at the 

FY 2015 TWG meeting may be found on NIJ.gov and are intended to facilitate proposal 

development.

Research and Evaluation for the Testing and Interpretation of 

Physical Evidence in Publicly Funded Forensic Laboratories 

Applications Due: February 27, 2017 

Eligibility 

Eligible applicants are limited to States (including territories) and units of local government 

(including federally recognized Indian tribal governments as determined by the Secretary of the 

Interior). Applicants are limited to publicly funded forensic science laboratories that are currently 

accredited by an independent accrediting or certifying forensic science organization. Publicly 

funded forensic science laboratories include State, regional, county, municipal, and tribal 

agencies. This solicitation excludes federal agencies. 

NIJ welcomes applications under which two or more entities would carry out the federal award; 

however, only one entity may be the applicant. Any others must be proposed as subrecipients 

(“subgrantees”).1 The applicant must be the entity that would have primary responsibility for 

carrying out the award, including administering funding and managing the entire project, 

including monitoring and appropriately managing any subawards (“subgrants”).

Under this solicitation, any particular applicant entity may submit more than one application, as 

long as each application proposes a different project in response to the solicitation. Also, an 

entity may be proposed as a subrecipient (“subgrantee”) in more than one application.

Deadline

Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are 

due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on February 27, 2017.

To be considered timely, an application must be submitted by the application deadline using 

Grants.gov, and the applicant must have received a validation message from Grants.gov that 

indicates successful and timely submission. OJP urges applicants to submit applications at least 

 

1

 For additional information on subawards, see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application 

and Submission Information. 
NIJ-2017-11610

2

72 hours prior to the application due date, in order to allow time for the applicant to receive 

validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion 

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

OJP encourages all applicants to read this Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov.

For additional information, see How to Apply in Section D. Application and Submission 

Information.

Contact Information

For technical assistance with submitting an application, contact the Grants.gov Customer 

Support Hotline at 800-518-4726 or 606-545-5035, or via email to support@grants.gov. The

Grants.gov Support Hotline operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on federal holidays.

An applicant that experiences unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond its control that 

prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline must email the NIJ contact identified 

below within 24 hours after the application deadline in order to request approval to submit a 

lateapplication. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears under 

“Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues” in the How to Apply section.

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact the National Criminal 

Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Response Center: toll-free at 1-800-851-3420; via TTY at 

301-240-6310 (hearing impaired only); email grants@ncjrs.gov; fax to 301-240-5830; or web 

chat at https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. The NCJRS Response Center hours of 

operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 

8:00 p.m. eastern time on the solicitation close date. General information on applying for NIJ 

awards can be found at www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/welcome.aspx. Answers to frequently asked 

questions that may assist applicants are posted at www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/faqs.aspx.

Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: NIJ-2017-11610

Release date: December 29, 2016
NIJ-2017-11610

3

Contents

A. Program Description.............................................................................................................. 4

Overview ................................................................................................................................ 4

Program-Specific Information ................................................................................................. 4

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products ........................................ 5

B. Federal Award Information..................................................................................................... 7

Type of Award ........................................................................................................................ 8

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls......................................................... 8

Budget Information ................................................................................................................. 9

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement......................................................................................10

Pre-Agreement Costs ............................................................................................................10

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver...............................10

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...................11

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)...................................................11

C. Eligibility Information.............................................................................................................11

D. Application and Submission Information ...............................................................................11

What an Application Should Include ......................................................................................11

How to Apply .........................................................................................................................26

E. Application Review Information.............................................................................................29

Review Criteria ......................................................................................................................29

Review Process.....................................................................................................................31

F. Federal Award Administration Information ............................................................................33

Federal Award Notices ..........................................................................................................33

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements ............................................33

General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements .............................34

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...................................................................................34

H. Other Information..................................................................................................................34

Provide Feedback to OJP......................................................................................................34

Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) ....................34

Provide Feedback to OJP......................................................................................................35

Application Checklist .............................................................................................................36
NIJ-2017-11610

4

Research and Evaluation for the Testing and 

Interpretation of Physical Evidence in Publicly 

Funded Forensic Laboratories

(CFDA No. 16.560)

A. Program Description

Overview

With this solicitation, NIJ seeks proposals for research and evaluation projects that will: 

1. Identify and inform the forensic community of best practices through the evaluation of 

existing laboratory protocols; and

2. Have a direct and immediate impact on laboratory efficiency and assist in making 

laboratory policy decisions.

The intent of this program is to direct the findings of the research and evaluation toward the 

identification of the most efficient, accurate, reliable, and cost-effective methods for the 

identification, analysis, and interpretation of physical evidence for criminal justice purposes. The 

forensic science operational needs discussed at the FY 2015 TWG meeting may be found on 

NIJ.gov.

Statutory Authority: Any awards under this solicitation would be made under statutory 

authority provided by a full-year appropriations act for FY 2017. As of the writing of this 

solicitation, the Department of Justice is operating under a short-term "Continuing Resolution;" 

no full-year appropriation for the Department has been enacted for FY 2017.

Program-Specific Information

This solicitation seeks applications for research and evaluation studies to produce practical

knowledge that has the potential to improve the examination and interpretation of physical 

evidence in forensic science laboratories.

Proposals are expected to identify the forensic science discipline(s) intended to benefit from the 

project. The forensic science discipline(s) should be listed in the key words on the title 

page. Some of the forensic science disciplines are listed below.

 DNA and forensic biology.

 Forensic crime scene analysis.

 Forensic anthropology and forensic odontology.

 Controlled substances.

 Fire debris analysis and arson scene investigations.
NIJ-2017-11610

5

 Firearms and toolmark identification.

 Latent print.

 Shoeprint/tire tread examination.

 Questioned documents.

 Trace evidence.

 Forensic toxicology.

 Medicolegal death investigations, including forensic pathology.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

NIJ’s Research and Evaluation for the Testing and Interpretation of Physical Evidence in 

Publicly Funded Forensic Laboratories program is intended to meet the following goals and 

objectives. Proposals should employ a scientific approach to decisions on how to assess the 

testing and processing of physical evidence. These approaches should take into consideration 

general variables, such as accuracy, reliability, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency. Every effort 

should be made to validate the research by using actual casework samples. If this is not 

possible, proposals should include a detailed description of how realistic samples will be 

generated. Proposals should address at least one of the goals specified below:

1. Assessing Existing Laboratory Protocols – Improve understanding of the scientific 

rationale underpinning existing laboratory processes.

To achieve this goal, applicants should perform research and evaluation of existing laboratory 

schemes and methods to determine possible improvements. Examples of such projects include:

 Evaluation of minimum acceptance criteria of analytical data, such as mass spectra, 

generated in case samples.

 Evaluation of accuracy gained from additional orthogonal testing of controlled substance 

samples.

 Evaluation of the effectiveness of a blind verification program for technical reviews.

 Evaluation of implementation of software and statistical methods used for the

interpretation of DNA mixtures.

2. Evaluating Emerging Methods – Assess the value of emerging laboratory processes.

To achieve this goal, applicants should conduct research to compare emerging methods to 

those currently used to accomplish the same purpose in their laboratories. These evaluations 

should consider factors such as accuracy, reliability, cost, and analysis time. Examples of such 

projects include:

 Comparison of newly developed broad spectrum method to existing multi-step 

method(s).
NIJ-2017-11610

6

 Comparison of methodology on instrumentation new to either the laboratory or to the 

field to instrumentation already in use in the laboratory.

Postdoctoral Fellowship

To allow for the addition of this work to existing casework demands, and to foster collaboration 

between emerging forensic science researchers and forensic science laboratories, NIJ strongly 

encourages applicants to consider funding a postdoctoral fellowship through this award at their 

facility. This research model will encourage new research scientists to pursue careers in 

forensic science, allow the laboratory to benefit from the fellow’s research skills as they work on 

the proposed project, and decrease the amount of time which the forensic scientist must take 

away from their own casework to work on the proposed project.

A key component for a successful postdoctoral research experience is a robust mentorship 

program to prepare the researcher for future career activities. NIJ strongly encourages that 

laboratories submit a postdoctoral mentorship plan that describes the activities that will assist 

the fellow with career placement. Examples of postdoctoral mentoring activities can be found 

from the National Science Foundation (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf15001/

index.jsp?org=EF) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science 

(http://myidp.sciencecareers.org/).

Applicants who wish to propose a postdoctoral fellowship in the form of a subaward as part of 

their application are advised to consult Section B of this solicitation, which describes required 

documents for proposals involving subrecipients.

NIJ also strongly encourages applicants to seek guidance from a statistician in order to ensure 

that rigorous testing measures are employed. Areas that may benefit from a statistician include

— but are not limited to — research design (e.g., experimental design, planning sample size or 

sampling designs, designing data collection methods), selection and application of appropriate 

statistical methods, and how to use software to perform data analyses. Such associations foster 

a greater understanding of the testing and validation issues unique to the field of forensic 

science, and may strengthen the scope of the proposed application.

Required Data Sets and Associated Files and Documentation. Any recipient of an award 

under this solicitation will be expected to submit to the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data 

(NACJD) all data sets that result in whole or in part from the work funded by the award, along 

with associated files and any documentation necessary for future efforts by others to reproduce 

the project’s findings and/or to extend the scientific value of the data set through secondary 

analysis. For more information, see “Program Narrative” in Section D. Application and 

Submission Information.

In addition to these deliverables (and the required reports and data on performance measures 

described in Section F. Federal Award Administration Information), NIJ expects scholarly 

products to result from each award under this solicitation, taking the form of one or more 

published, peer-reviewed, scientific journal articles, and/or (if appropriate) law review journal 

articles, book chapter(s) or book(s) in the academic press, technological prototypes, patented 

inventions, or similar scientific products.

Some projects may be chosen for Technology Evaluation or Technology Transition 

Workshop(s). Examples of previous evaluations and workshops can be found on NIJ’s Forensic 
NIJ-2017-11610

7

Technology Center of Excellence webpage (https://www.forensiccoe.org/Our-Impact/SharingKnowledge/Workshops).

The Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products are directly related to the 

performance measures set out in the table immediately below.

Performance Measures

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides

Conduct research in 

science, technology, 

engineering, and/or 

mathematics having 

clear implications for 

criminal justice policy 

and practice in the 

United States.

1.Relevance to the needs of the field as 

measured by whether the project’s 

substantive scope did not deviate from the 

funded proposal or any subsequent 

agency-approved modifications to the 

scope.

2.Quality of the research as demonstrated by 

the scholarly products that result in whole 

or in part from work funded under the NIJ 

award (published, peer-reviewed, scientific 

journal articles, and/or (as appropriate for 

the funded project) law review journal 

articles, book chapter(s) or book(s) in the 

academic press, technological prototypes, 

patented inventions, or similar scientific 

products).

3.Quality of management as measured by 

such factors as whether significant project 

milestones were achieved, reporting and 

other deadlines were met, and costs 

remained within approved limits.

4.If applicable, the number of technologies 

fielded as a result (in whole or in part) of 

work funded under the NIJ award.

1. Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual

and final progress 

reports of the work 

performed under the NIJ 

award, and, if 

applicable, an annual 

audit report.

2. List of citation(s) to all 

scholarly products that 

resulted in whole or in 

part from work funded 

under the NIJ award.

3. If applicable, each data 

set that resulted in 

whole or in part from 

work funded under the 

NIJ award.

4. If applicable, a 

description of all 

technologies fielded as 

a result (in whole or in 

part) of work funded 

under the NIJ award.

B. Federal Award Information

NIJ estimates that it will make awards with an estimated amount awarded of up to $3,000,000.

NIJ expects to make awards to begin on January 1, 2018.

To allow time for (among other things) any necessary post-award review and financial clearance 

by OJP of the proposed budget (and for any associated responses or other action(s) that may 

be required of the recipient), applicants should propose an award start date of January 1, 2018.

If the applicant is proposing a project that reasonably could be conducted in discrete phases, 

with each phase resulting in completion of one or more significant, defined milestones, then NIJ 

strongly recommends that the applicant structure the application—specifically including the 

narrative, expected scholarly products, timelines/milestones, and budget detail worksheet and 
NIJ-2017-11610

8

budget narrative—to clearly set out each phase. (This is particularly the case if the applicant 

proposes a project that will exceed—in cost or the length of the period of performance—the 

amount or length anticipated for an individual award (or awards) under this solicitation.) Given 

limitations on the availability to NIJ of funds for awards for research, development, and 

evaluation, this information will assist NIJ in considering whether partial funding of applications 

would be productive. (If, in FY 2017, NIJ elects to fund only certain phases of a proposed 

project, the expected scholarly products from the partial-funding award may, in some cases, 

vary from those described above.)

NIJ may, in certain cases, provide additional funding in future years to awards made under its 

research, development, and evaluation solicitations, through supplemental awards. In making 

decisions regarding supplemental awards, NIJ will consider, among other factors, the availability 

of appropriations, OJP’s strategic priorities, and OJP’s assessment of both the management of 

the award (for example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and the progress of the 

work funded under the award.

All awards are subject to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or 

additional requirements that may be imposed by law.

Type of Award

NIJ expects that any award under this solicitation will be in the form of a grant. See 

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements, under Section F. Federal Award 

Administration Information, for a brief discussion of important statutes, regulations, and award 

conditions that apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants.

Please note: Any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to comply with 

DOJ regulations on confidentiality and protection of human subjects. See “Requirements related 

to Research” under “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and 

Cooperative Agreements” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

Award recipients and subrecipients (including recipients or subrecipients that are pass-through 

entities2) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements3 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 

200.303:

(a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that 

provides reasonable assurance that [the recipient (and any subrecipient)] is 

managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, 

and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls 

should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the 

Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and 

the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of 

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

 

2 For purposes of this solicitation, the phrase “pass-through entity” includes any recipient or subrecipient that provides 

a subaward (“subgrant”) to carry out part of the funded award or program.

3 The "Part 200 Uniform Requirements” means the DOJ regulation at 2 C.F.R Part 2800, which adopts (with certain 

modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200.
NIJ-2017-11610

9

(b) Comply with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the 

Federal awards.

(c) Evaluate and monitor [the recipient’s (and any subrecipient’s)] compliance with 

statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of Federal awards.

(d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including 

noncompliance identified in audit findings.

(e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable 

information and other information the Federal awarding agency or pass-through 

entity designates as sensitive or [the recipient (or any subrecipient)] considers 

sensitive consistent with applicable Federal, state, local, and tribal laws regarding 

privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

To help ensure that applicants understand applicable administrative requirements and cost 

principles, OJP encourages prospective applicants to enroll, at no charge, in the DOJ Grants 

Financial Management Online Training, available here.

Budget Information

What will not be funded:

 Applications primarily to purchase equipment, materials, software, or supplies, or to 

contract or purchase training, validation, or other services that will complete the majority 

of the proposed research project. (A budget may include these items if they are 

necessary to conduct research, development, demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.)

Proposals that include equipment purchases should include a discussion of how 

federally-funded equipment is proposed to be used after the funded work has been 

completed and/or the project period has ended. Note that OJP may issue specific 

equipment disposition instructions in appropriate circumstances.

 Applications that are not responsive to this specific solicitation. This includes:

o Proposals that do not propose assessing current lab processes, or otherwise do not 

respond to the specific goals of this solicitation.

o Proposals that do not clearly address criminal justice concerns in the United 

States.

 Work that will be funded under another specific solicitation.

 Costs associated with conducting conferences. A conference is a symposium, seminar, 

workshop, or any other organized and formal meeting, whether conducted face-to-face 

or via the Internet, where individuals assemble (or meet virtually) to exchange 

information and views or explore or clarify a defined subject, problem, or area of 

knowledge, whether or not a published report results from such meeting. A meeting 

where a gathering discusses general matters as part of a normal course of doing 

business is not considered a conference. Funds may be used to attend conferences for 

the purposes of disseminating research findings.
NIJ-2017-11610

10

 Proposals with the sole purpose of processing or analyzing casework samples.

 Proposals in the area of digital evidence or digital forensics. Digital evidence includes 

information stored or transmitted in binary form that may be relied on in court. It is 

typically found on computer hard drives, mobile phones, personal digital assistants, 

CDs/DVDs, flash memory equipment and other electronic devices. Digital evidence is 

commonly associated with electronic crime (e.g., child pornography or credit card fraud); 

however, digital evidence can also be used as forensic evidence in other types of 

crimes.4

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

See “Cofunding” paragraph under item 4 (“Budget and Associated Documentation”) under What 

an Application Should Include in Section D. Application and Submission Information.

Pre-Agreement Costs

Requests for approval of pre-agreement costs will not be considered under this solicitation.

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

With respect to any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation, a recipient may 

not use federal funds to pay total cash compensation (salary plus cash bonuses) to any 

employee of the recipient at a rate that exceeds 110% of the maximum annual salary payable to

a member of the federal government’s Senior Executive Service (SES) at an agency with a 

Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.

5 The 2017 salary table for SES 

employees is available at the Office of Personnel Management website. Note: A recipient may 

compensate an employee at a greater rate, provided the amount in excess of this compensation 

limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Non-federal funds used for any such additional 

compensation will not be considered matching funds, where match requirements apply.) If only 

a portion of an employee’s time is charged to an OJP award, the maximum allowable 

compensation is equal to the percentage of time worked times the maximum salary limitation.

The Director of the National Institute of Justice may exercise discretion to waive, on an 

individual basis, this limitation on compensation rates allowable under an award. An applicant 

that requests a waiver should include a detailed justification in the budget narrative of its 

application. An applicant that does not submit a waiver request and justification with its 

application should anticipate that OJP will require the applicant to adjust and resubmit the 

budget.

The justification should address — in the context of the work the individual would do under the 

award — the particular qualifications and expertise of the individual, the uniqueness of a service 

the individual will provide, the individual’s specific knowledge of the proposed program or 

project, and a statement that explains whether and how the individual’s salary under the award 

would be commensurate with the regular and customary rate for an individual with his/her 

qualifications and expertise, and for the work he/she would do under the award.

 

4 www.nij.gov/topics/forensics/evidence/digital/welcome.htm.

5 OJP does not apply this limitation on the use of award funds to the nonprofit organizations listed in Appendix VIII to 

2 C.F.R. Part 200.
NIJ-2017-11610

11

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs

OJP strongly encourages every applicant that proposes to use award funds for any conference-, 

meeting-, or training-related activity (or similar event) to review carefully—before submitting an 

application—the OJP policy and guidance on approval, planning, and reporting of such events, 

available at www.ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm. OJP 

policy and guidance (1) encourage minimization of conference, meeting, and training costs; (2) 

require prior written approval (which may affect project timelines) of most conference, meeting, 

and training costs for cooperative agreement recipients and of some conference, meeting, and 

training costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, which include a general prohibition of 

all food and beverage costs.

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

If an applicant proposes a program or activity that would deliver services or benefits to 

individuals, the costs of taking reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to those services 

or benefits for individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable. Reasonable steps 

to provide meaningful access to services or benefits may include interpretation or translation 

services, where appropriate.

For additional information, see the "Civil Rights Compliance" section under “Overview of Legal 

Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements” in the OJP 

Funding Resource Center.

C. Eligibility Information

For eligibility information, see title page.

For information on cost sharing or match requirements, see “What an Application Should 

Include” in Section D. Application and Submission Information.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

This section describes in detail what an application should include. An applicant should 

anticipate that if it fails to submit an application that contains all of the specified elements, it may 

negatively affect the review of its application; and, should a decision be made to make an 

award, it may result in the inclusion of award conditions that preclude the recipient from 

accessing or using award funds until the recipient satisfies the conditions and OJP makes the 

funds available.

Moreover, an applicant should anticipate that an application that OJP determines is 

nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation, or that OJP determines does not include the 

application elements that NIJ has designated to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review 

nor receive further consideration. For this solicitation, NIJ has designated the following 

application elements as critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, Budget Narrative, 

resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel, and Proof of Forensic Laboratory Accreditation. (For 

purposes of this solicitation, “key personnel” means the principal investigator, and any and all 

co-principal investigators and other significant contributors.) An applicant may combine the 

Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant 

submits only one budget document, it must contain both narrative and detail information.
NIJ-2017-11610

12

Please review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply to be sure 

applications are submitted in permitted formats.

OJP strongly recommends that applicants use appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., 

“Program Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative,” “Timelines,” 

“Memoranda of Understanding,” “Resumes”) for all attachments. Also, OJP recommends that 

applicants include resumes in a single file.

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

The SF-424 is a required standard form used as a cover sheet for submission of preapplications, applications, and related information. Grants.gov and OJP’s Grants 

Management System (GMS) take information from the applicant’s profile to populate the 

fields on this form. When selecting "type of applicant," if the applicant is a for-profit entity, 

select "For-Profit Organization" or "Small Business" (as applicable).

To avoid processing delays, applicants must include an accurate legal name on their SF424. Current OJP award recipients, when completing the field for “Legal Name” should use 

the same legal name that appears on the prior year award document which is also the legal 

name stored in OJP’s financial system. On the SF-424, enter the Legal Name in box 5 and 

Employer Identification Number (EIN) in box 6 exactly as it appears on the prior year award 

document. Applicants with current awards must ensure that their GMS profile is current. If it 

isn't they should submit a Grant Adjustment Notice updating the information on their GMS 

profile prior to applying under this solicitation.

New applicants should enter the Official Legal Name and address of the applicant entity in 

box 5 and the EIN in box 6 of the SF-424. Applicants must attach official legal documents to 

their applications (e.g., articles of incorporation, 501C3, etc.) to confirm the legal name, 

address, and EIN entered into the SF-424.

Intergovernmental Review: This solicitation ("funding opportunity") is not subject to 

Executive Order 12372. (In completing the SF-424, applicants are to make the appropriate 

selection in response to question 19 to indicate that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 

12372.”)

2. Project Abstract

The project abstract is a very important part of the application, and serves as an introduction 

to the proposed project. NIJ uses the project abstract for a number of purposes, including 

assignment of the application to an appropriate review panel. If the application is funded, the 

project abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe the project.

Applications should include a high-quality project abstract that summarizes the proposed 

project in 250-400 words. Project abstracts should be—

 Written for a general public audience.

 Submitted as a separate attachment with “Project Abstract” as part of its file name.

 A single-spaced Word document, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman) 

with 1-inch margins.
NIJ-2017-11610

13

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

program narrative.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 14 double-spaced pages 

in 12-point font with 1-inch margins, of which a minimum of seven (7) pages should be 

dedicated to the description of the project/program design and implementation. If included in 

the main body of the program narrative, tables, charts, figures, and other illustrations count 

toward the 14-page limit for the narrative section. The project abstract, table of contents, 

appendices, and government forms do not count toward the 14-page limit.

The program narrative should be attached as a separate file with an appropriately 

descriptive file name.

If the program narrative fails to comply with these length-related restrictions, NIJ may 

consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions.

The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative.6

Program Narrative Guidelines:

a. Title Page (not counted against the 14-page program narrative limit).

The title page should include the title of the project, submission date, funding 

opportunity number, key words, and the name and complete contact information 

(that is, address, telephone number, and e-mail address) for both the applicant 

and the principal investigator.

b. Resubmit Response (if applicable) (not counted against the 14-page program 

narrative limit).

If an applicant is resubmitting a proposal presented previously to NIJ, but not 

funded, the applicant should indicate this. A statement should be provided, no 

more than two pages, addressing: (1) the title, submission date, and NIJassigned application number of the previous proposal, and (2) a brief summary of 

revisions to the proposal, including responses to previous feedback received 

from NIJ.

c. Table of Contents and Figures (not counted against the 14-page program narrative 

limit).

 

6 As noted earlier, if the proposed program or project reasonably could be conducted in discrete phases, with each 

phase resulting in completion of one or more significant, defined milestones, then NIJ strongly recommends that the 

applicant structure the application – specifically including the narrative, expected scholarly products, 

timelines/milestones, and budget detail worksheet and budget narrative – to set out each phase clearly. (In 

appropriate cases, the expected scholarly product(s) from a particular phase may vary from those described above.) 

See generally, “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products” under “Program-Specific 

Information,” above.
NIJ-2017-11610

14

d. Main Body.

The main body of the program narrative should describe the proposed project in 

depth. The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative: 

 Statement of the Problem.

 Project Design and Implementation.

 Potential Impact.

 Capabilities/Competencies.

The main body of the program narrative should be organized in the specified order 

above. Start each section with the appropriate section heading – Statement of the 

Problem, Project Design and Implementation, Potential Impact, 

Capabilities/Competencies.

Within these sections, the narrative should address:

 Statement of the Problem.

o Explain the importance of the problem or critical barrier to progress in 

the field that the proposed project addresses.

o Explain how the proposed project will improve scientific knowledge, 

technical capability, and/or forensic practice. Describe how concepts, 

methods, technologies, or services that drive the forensic science field 

will be changed if the proposed aims are achieved.

 Project Design and Implementation. (This section should account for a 

minimum of seven (7) pages of the main body of the narrative.)

o State concisely the goals of the proposed research.

o Describe the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses to be used to 

accomplish the specific aims of the project. Describe the experimental 

design and methods proposed and how they will achieve robust and 

unbiased results. Include how the data will be collected, analyzed, and 

interpreted as well as any resource sharing plans as appropriate.

o Power and Effect Size: Use power analyses to describe the range of 

effect sizes detectable by the study. Address relevant features of the 

analytic plan, such as the model(s) to be tested, the extent of multiple 

testing and what significance level would be used for testing. Include 

all appropriate parameters. If the study design requires separate 

analysis of subject groups, provide power analyses for each category. 

If there is a plan to test for environment effects, address the power for 

detection of these effects.
NIJ-2017-11610

15

o Data Analyses: Provide a thorough plan for data analyses. Include: 

analytical approaches to be used and their justification; plans for 

quality control analyses; methods to control for possible confounding 

effects; how false positive rates will be controlled in light of multiple 

testing; etc. If there is a plan to analyze the data obtained with earlier 

data, or to perform comparisons to determine success, describe your 

strategy for that process.

 Potential Impact.

o Summarize the expected outcome(s), including the impact that the 

results of the proposed research will exert on the discipline(s) involved.

o Explain the criminal justice significance of the proposed study.

o Explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current 

forensic practice paradigms.

 Capabilities/Competencies.

o Facilities & Other Resources: Describe how the scientific environment 

in which the research will be done contributes to the probability of 

success (e.g., institutional support, physical resources, and 

intellectual rapport). In describing the scientific environment in which 

the work will be done, discuss ways in which the proposed studies will 

benefit from unique features of the scientific environment or subject 

populations or will employ useful collaborative arrangements. If there 

are multiple performance sites, describe the resources available at 

each site.

o Equipment: List major items of equipment already available for this 

project and, if appropriate identify location and pertinent capabilities. 

o Senior/Key Personnel Profile: Describe each senior/key personnel 

member’s role in the project and why the individual is well-suited for 

that role. The relevant factors may include: aspects of past training; 

previous experimental work on this specific topic or related topics; 

technical expertise; collaborators or scientific environment; and/or 

past performance in this or related fields. Senior/key personnel are 

defined as all individuals who contribute in a substantive, meaningful 

way to the scientific development or execution of the project, whether 

or not salaries are requested. Consultants should be included if they 

meet this definition.

 Principal Investigator (PI) Profile should be listed first.

 Senior/Key Personnel Profile: Any remaining senior/key personnel

profiles should be listed in alphabetical order. While alphabetical 

order is preferred, it is not required. However, be aware that these 

profiles will appear in the application in the order provided by the 
NIJ-2017-11610

16

applicant. Therefore, peer reviewers will see them in the order 

presented. Those with a postdoctoral role should be included.

 Other Significant Contributors (OSCs): OSCs are those individuals 

who commit to contribute to the scientific development or 

execution of the project, but do not commit any specified 

measurable effort (i.e., person months) to the project. These 

individuals are typically presented at effort of “zero person 

months” or "as needed." Individuals with measurable effort may 

not be listed as Other Significant Contributors (OSCs). 

Consultants should be included if they meet the OSC definition. 

OSCs should be listed after all senior/key persons.

 Planned Scholarly Products (See Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and 

Expected Scholarly Products under Program-Specific Information, above, 

for a discussion of expected scholarly products.)

 Implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the United States.

 Management plan and organization.

 Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the 

proposed project). Applicants should identify plans (if any) to produce or 

to make available to broader interested audiences – such as 

criminal/juvenile justice (and other related fields) practitioners or 

policymakers – summary information from the planned scholarly products 

of the proposed project (such as summaries or translational materials of 

articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals), in a form designed to be 

readily accessible and useful to those audiences. (Such dissemination 

might include, for example, trade press articles and webinars.)

e. Appendices (not counted against the 14-page program narrative limit) include:

 Bibliography/references.

 Any tools/instruments, questionnaires, tables/charts/graphs, or maps 

pertaining to the proposed project that are supplemental to such items 

included in the main body of the narrative.

 Curriculum vitae or resumes of the principal investigator and any and all coprincipal investigators. In addition, curriculum vitae, resumes, or biographical 

sketches of all other individuals (regardless of “investigator” status) who will 

be significantly involved in substantive aspects of the proposal (including, for 

example, individuals such as statisticians serving as consultants to conduct

proposed data analysis).

 To assist OJP in assessing actual or apparent conflicts of interest (including 

such conflicts on the part of prospective reviewers of the application, a 

complete list of the individuals named or otherwise identified anywhere in the 

application (including in the budget or in any other attachment) who will or 

may work (or advise or consult) on the proposed research, development, or 
NIJ-2017-11610

17

evaluation project. This applies to all such individuals, including, for example, 

individuals who are or would be employees of the applicant or employees of 

any proposed subrecipient entity, any individuals who themselves may be a 

subrecipient, and individuals who may (or will) work without compensation 

(such as advisory board members). This appendix to the program narrative is 

to include, for each listed individual: name, title, employer, any other 

potentially-pertinent organizational affiliation(s), and the individual's proposed 

roles and responsibilities in carrying out the proposed project. If the 

application identifies any specific entities or organizations (other than the 

applicant) that will or may work (or advise or consult) on the proposed project, 

without also naming any associated individuals, the name of each such 

organization also should be included on this list. Applicants should use the 

“Proposed Project Staff, Affiliation, and Roles” form available at

www.nij.gov/funding/documents/nij-project-staff-template.xlsx to provide this 

list.

If the application (including the budget) identifies any proposed noncompetitive agreements that are or may be considered procurement 

"contracts" (rather than subawards) for purposes of federal grants 

administrative requirements the applicant also must list the entities with which 

the applicant proposes to contract. Applicants should provide this list as a 

separate sheet entitled "Proposed non-competitive procurement contracts."

For information on distinctions — for purposes of federal grants 

administrative requirements — between subawards and procurement 

contracts under awards, see “Budget and Associated Documentation,” below.

 Proposed project timeline and expected milestones.

 Human Subjects Protection paperwork (documentation and forms related to 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) review). (See

nij.gov/funding/humansubjects/Pages/welcome.aspx) NOTE: Final IRB 

approval is not required at the time an application is submitted.

 Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to

nij.gov/funding/humansubjects/pages/confidentiality.aspx).

 List of any previous and current NIJ awards to applicant organization and 

investigator(s), including the NIJ-assigned award numbers and a brief 

description of any scholarly products that resulted in whole or in part from 

work funded under the NIJ award(s). (See “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, 

and Expected Scholarly Products” under “Program-Specific Information,” 

above, for definition of “scholarly products.”)

 Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as universities, law 

enforcement and correctional agencies (if applicable).

 List of other agencies, organizations, or funding sources to which this 

application has been submitted (if applicable)
NIJ-2017-11610

18

 Data archiving plan. Applicants should anticipate that NIJ will require (through 

special award conditions, which may include a partial withholding of award 

funds) that data sets resulting in whole or in part from projects funded under 

this solicitation be submitted for archiving with the NACJD (See 

www.nij.gov/funding/data-resources-program/applying/Pages/data-archivingstrategies.aspx)

Applications should include as an appendix a brief plan — labeled “Data 

Archiving Plan” — to comply with data archiving requirements. The plan 

should provide brief details about proposed data management and archiving, 

including submission to NIJ (through NACJD) of all files and documentation

necessary to allow for future efforts by others to reproduce the project’s 

findings and/or to extend the scientific value of the data set through 

secondary analysis. Pertinent files and documentation include, among other 

things, qualitative and quantitative data produced, instrumentation and data 

collection forms, codebook(s), any specialized programming code necessary 

to reproduce all constructed measures and the original data analysis, 

description of necessary de-identification procedures, and (when required) a 

copy of the privacy certificate and informed consent protocols.

The plan should be one or two pages in length and include the level of effort 

associated with meeting archiving requirements.

Note that required data sets are to be submitted 90 days before the end of 

the period of performance.

4. Budget and Associated Documentation

Budget document(s) should be attached as a separate file with an appropriately 

descriptive file name.

a. Budget Detail Worksheet

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at 

www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. Applicants that 

submit their budget in a different format should use the budget categories listed in the 

sample budget worksheet. (An applicant should include in the budget work associated 

with satisfying data archiving requirements.) NIJ expects applicants to provide a 

thorough narrative for each section of the Budget Detail Worksheet. The Budget Detail 

Worksheet should break out costs by year.

For questions pertaining to budget and examples of allowable and unallowable costs, 

see the DOJ Grants Financial Guide.

b. Budget Narrative

The budget narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category of expense 

listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. OJP expects proposed budgets to be complete, 

cost effective, and allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary for project 

activities).
NIJ-2017-11610

19

An applicant should demonstrate in its budget narrative how it will maximize cost 

effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost 

effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the project. For 

example, a budget narrative should detail why planned in-person meetings are 

necessary, or how technology and collaboration with outside organizations could be 

used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.

The budget narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond clearly with the 

information and figures provided in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should 

explain how the applicant estimated and calculated all costs, and how those costs are 

necessary to the completion of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables 

for clarification purposes, but need not be in a spreadsheet format. As with the Budget 

Detail Worksheet, the budget narrative should describe costs by year.

c. Cofunding

An award made by NIJ under this solicitation may account for up to 100 percent of the 

total cost of the project. The application should indicate whether it is feasible for the 

applicant to contribute cash, facilities, or services as non-federal support for the project. 

The application should identify generally any such contributions that the applicant 

expects to make and the proposed budget should indicate in detail which items, if any, 

will be supported with non-federal contributions.

For additional match information, see the Cost Sharing or Match Requirement section 

under Section B. Federal Award Information.

If a successful application proposes a voluntary match amount, and OJP approves the 

budget, the total match amount incorporated into the approved budget becomes 

mandatory and subject to audit.

d. Information on Proposed Subawards (if any), as well as on Proposed Procurement 

Contracts (if any)

Applicants for OJP awards typically may propose to make “subawards.” Applicants also 

may propose to enter into procurement “contracts” under the award.

Whether — for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — a particular 

agreement between a recipient and a third party will be considered a "subaward" or 

instead considered a procurement "contract" under the award is determined by federal 

rules and applicable OJP guidance. It is an important distinction, in part because the 

federal administrative rules and requirements that apply to "subawards" and 

procurement "contracts" under awards differ markedly.

In general, the central question is the relationship between what the third-party will do 

under its agreement with the recipient and what the recipient has committed (to OJP) to 

do under its award to further a public purpose (e.g., services the recipient will provide, 

products it will develop or modify, research or evaluation it will conduct). If a third party 

will provide some of the services the recipient has committed (to OJP) to provide, will 

develop or modify all or part of a product the recipient has committed (to OJP) to 

develop or modify, or will conduct part of the research or evaluation the recipient has 
NIJ-2017-11610

20

committed (to OJP) to conduct, OJP will consider the agreement with the third party a 

subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements.

This will be true even if the recipient, for internal or other non-federal purposes, labels or 

treats its agreement as a procurement, a contract, or a procurement contract. Neither 

the title nor the structure of an agreement determines whether the agreement — for 

purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — is a subaward or is instead a 

procurement “contract” under an award.

Additional guidance on the circumstances under which (for purposes of federal grants 

administrative requirements) an agreement constitutes a subaward as opposed to a 

procurement contract under an award, is available (along with other resources) on the 

OJP Part 200 Uniform Requirements web page.

1. Information on proposed subawards

A recipient of an OJP award may not make subawards ("subgrants") unless the recipient 

has specific federal authorization to do so. Unless an applicable statute or DOJ 

regulation specifically authorizes (or requires) subawards, a recipient must have

authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward.

A particular subaward may be authorized by OJP because the recipient included a 

sufficiently-detailed description and justification of the proposed subaward in the 

application as approved by OJP. If, however, a particular subaward is not authorized by 

federal statute or regulation, and is not sufficiently described and justified in the 

application as approved by OJP, the recipient will be required, post-award, to request 

and obtain written authorization from OJP before it may make the subaward.

If an applicant proposes to make one or more subawards to carry out the federal award 

and program, the applicant should — (1) identify (if known) the proposed subrecipient(s), 

(2) describe in detail what each subrecipient will do to carry out the federal award and 

federal program, and (3) provide a justification for the subaward(s), with details on 

pertinent matters such as special qualifications and areas of expertise. Pertinent 

information on subawards should appear not only in the Program Narrative, but also in 

the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative.

2. Information on proposed procurement contracts (with specific justification for 

proposed noncompetitive contracts over $150,000)

Unlike a recipient contemplating a subaward, a recipient of an OJP award generally 

does not need specific prior federal authorization to enter into an agreement that — for 

purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — is considered a procurement 

contract, provided that (1) the recipient uses its own documented procurement 

procedures and (2) those procedures conform to applicable federal law, including the 

Procurement Standards of the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements (as set out at 2 

C.F.R. 200.317 - 200.326). The Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative should 

identify proposed procurement contracts. (As discussed above, subawards must be 

identified and described separately from procurement contracts.)

The Procurement Standards in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, however, reflect a 

general expectation that agreements that (for purposes of federal grants administrative 
NIJ-2017-11610

21

requirements) constitute procurement “contracts” under awards will be entered into on 

the basis of full and open competition. If a proposed procurement contract would exceed 

the simplified acquisition threshold — currently, $150,000 — a recipient of an OJP award 

may not proceed without competition unless and until the recipient receives specific 

advance authorization from OJP to use a non-competitive approach for the procurement.

An applicant that (at the time of its application) intends — without competition — to enter 

into a procurement contract that would exceed $150,000 should include a detailed 

justification that explains to OJP why, in the particular circumstances, it is appropriate to 

proceed without competition. Various considerations that may be pertinent to the 

justification are outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide.

e. Pre-Agreement Costs

For information on pre-agreement costs, see Section B. Federal Award Information.

5. Proof of Forensic Laboratory Accreditation (required)

Acceptable types of documentation of current accreditation include: an electronic (scanned) 

copy of the current accreditation certificate(s), a digital photograph of the current 

accreditation certificate(s), or a letter from the accrediting body that includes the certificate 

number. Additionally, if a certificate references another document that contains key 

information on the type or scope of the accreditation, provide a copy of that supplemental 

documentation. Independent accrediting or certifying organizations may include the 

American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLDLAB), Forensic Quality Services (FQS), the American Association for Laboratory 

Accreditation (A2LA), or other appropriate accrediting bodies. Applicants should list the 

name of their accrediting body in the key words on the title page.

6. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if:

(a) The recipient has a current (that is, unexpired), federally approved indirect cost rate; 

or

(b) The recipient is eligible to use, and elects to use, the “de minimis” indirect cost rate

described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.414(f).

An applicant with a current (that is, unexpired) federally-approved indirect cost rate is to 

attach a copy of the indirect cost rate agreement to the application. An applicant that does

not have a current federally-approved rate may request one through its cognizant federal 

agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant entity, or, if 

the applicant’s accounting system permits, applicants may propose to allocate costs in the 

direct cost categories.

For assistance with identifying the appropriate cognizant federal agency for indirect costs, 

please contact the Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If 

DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, an applicant may obtain information needed to submit 

an indirect cost rate proposal at www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf.
NIJ-2017-11610

22

Certain OJP recipients have the option of electing to use the “de minimis” indirect cost rate. 

An applicant eligible to use the “de minimis” rate that wishes to use the "de minimis" rate 

should attach written documentation to the application that advises OJP of both — (1) the 

applicant’s eligibility to use the “de minimis” rate, and (2) its election to do so. If an eligible 

applicant elects the “de minimis” rate, costs must be consistently charged as either indirect 

or direct costs, but may not be double charged or inconsistently charged as both. The "de 

minimis" rate may no longer be used once an approved federally-negotiated indirect cost 

rate is in place. (No entity that ever has had a federally-approved negotiated indirect cost 

rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.)

7. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

A tribe, tribal organization, or third party that proposes to provide direct services or 

assistance to residents on tribal lands should include in its application a resolution, letter, 

affidavit, or other documentation, as appropriate, that demonstrates (as a legal matter) that 

the applicant has the requisite authorization from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed 

project on tribal lands. In those instances when an organization or consortium of tribes 

applies for an award on behalf of a tribe or multiple specific tribes, the application should 

include appropriate legal documentation, as described above, from all tribes that would 

receive services or assistance under the award. A consortium of tribes for which existing 

consortium bylaws allow action without support from all tribes in the consortium (i.e., without 

an authorizing resolution or comparable legal documentation from each tribal governing 

body) may submit, instead, a copy of its consortium bylaws with the application.

8. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (including 

applicant disclosure of high-risk status)

Every applicant is to download, complete, and submit the OJP Financial Management and 

System of Internal Controls Questionnaire, as part of its application.

Among other things, the form requires each applicant to disclose whether it currently is 

designated “high-risk” by a federal grant-making agency outside of DOJ. For purposes of 

this disclosure, high risk includes any status under which a federal awarding agency 

provides additional oversight due to the applicant’s past performance, or other programmatic 

or financial concerns with the applicant. If an applicant is designated high risk by another 

federal awarding agency, the applicant must provide the following information:

 The federal awarding agency that currently designates the applicant high-risk

 The date the applicant was designated high-risk

 The high-risk point of contact at that federal awarding agency (name, phone number, 

and email address)

 The reasons for the high-risk status, as set out by the federal awarding agency

OJP seeks this information to help ensure appropriate federal oversight of OJP awards. An 

applicant that is considered “high-risk” by another federal awarding agency is not 

automatically disqualified from receiving an OJP award. OJP may, however, consider the 

information in award decisions, and may impose additional OJP oversight of any award 
NIJ-2017-11610

23

under this solicitation (including through the conditions that accompany the award 

document).

9. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

Each applicant must complete and submit this information. An applicant that expends any 

funds for lobbying activities is to provide all of the information requested on the form 

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). An applicant that does not expend any funds for 

lobbying activities is to enter “N/A” in the text boxes for item 10 (“a. Name and Address of 

Lobbying Registrant” and “b. Individuals Performing Services”).

10. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant disclosure of pending applications7

Each applicant is to disclose whether it has (or is proposed as a subrecipient under) any 

pending applications for federally-funded grants or cooperative agreements that (1)

include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed in the 

application under this solicitation, and (2) would cover the identical cost items outlined in 

the budget submitted to OJP under this solicitation. The applicant is to disclose both 

applications made directly to federal awarding agencies, and also applications for 

subawards of federal funds (e.g., applications to state agencies that will subaward 

(“subgrant”) federal funds).

OJP seeks this information to help avoid any inappropriate duplication of funding. 

Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement 

comprehensive programs or projects is encouraged and is not seen as inappropriate 

duplication.

Each applicant that has one or more pending applications as described above is to 

provide the following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 

months:

 The federal or state funding agency

 The solicitation name/project name

 The point of contact information at the applicable federal or state funding agency

 

7 Typically, the applicant is not the principal investigator; rather, the applicant, most frequently, is the institution, 

organization, or company in which the principal investigator is employed.
NIJ-2017-11610

24

SAMPLE

Federal or State 

Funding Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

Name/Phone/E-mail for Point of Contact at 

Federal or State Funding Agency

DOJ/Office of 

Community 

Oriented Policing 

Services (COPS)

COPS Hiring 

Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; jane.doe@usdoj.gov

Health and Human 

Services 

(HHS)/Substance 

Abuse & Mental 

Health Services 

Administration

Drug-Free 

Communities 

Mentoring 

Program/North 

County Youth 

Mentoring 

Program

John Doe, 202/000-0000; john.doe@hhs.gov

Each applicant should include the table as a separate attachment to its application. The 

file should be named “Disclosure of Pending Applications.” The applicant Legal Name on 

the application must match the entity named on the disclosure of pending applications 

statement. 

Any applicant that does not have any pending applications as described above is to 

submit, as a separate attachment, a statement to this effect: [Applicant Name on SF424] does not have (and is not proposed as a subrecipient under) any pending 

applications submitted within the last 12 months for federally-funded grants or 

cooperative agreements or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative 

agreements) that request funding to support the same project being proposed in this 

application to OJP and that would cover the identical cost items outlined in the budget 

submitted as part of this application.”

b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity 

When an application proposes research (including research and development) and/or 

evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and 

integrity, including appropriate safeguards, before it may receive award funds. The 

applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed 

research and/or evaluation, and any current or prior related projects. 

Each application should include an attachment that addresses both i. and ii. below. 

i. For purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to document research and 

evaluation independence and integrity by including one of the following two items: 

a. A specific assurance that the applicant has reviewed its application to identify 

any actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (including through review 

of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co-principal 

investigators, and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no 

such conflicts of interest – whether personal or financial or organizational 

(including on the part of the applicant entity or on the part of staff, 

investigators, or subrecipients) – that could affect the independence or 
NIJ-2017-11610

25

integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, and reporting of the 

research.

OR

b. A specific description of actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest that 

the applicant has identified – including through review of pertinent information 

on the principal investigator, any co-principal investigators, and any 

subrecipients – that could affect the independence or integrity of the 

research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research. These 

conflicts may be personal (e.g., on the part of investigators or other staff), 

financial, or organizational (related to the applicant or any subrecipient entity). 

Some examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations 

are those in which an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a 

spouse’s work product (actual conflict), or an investigator would be in a 

position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague (potential 

apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, 

as one example, generally an organization would not be given an award to 

evaluate a project, if that organization had itself provided substantial prior 

technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the 

project (whether funded by OJP or other sources), because the organization 

in such an instance might appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own 

prior work. The key is whether a reasonable person understanding all of the 

facts would be able to have confidence that the results of any research or 

evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial 

interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or 

research product is a problem and must be disclosed.

ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to address possible 

mitigation of research integrity concerns by including, at a minimum, one of the 

following two items:

a. If an applicant reasonably believes that no actual or potential apparent 

conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) exist, then the 

applicant should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it 

reached that conclusion. The applicant also is to include an explanation of the 

specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put 

in place, to identify and prevent (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such 

conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of 

performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include 

organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, 

personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the 

plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed.

OR

b. If the applicant has identified actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest 

(personal, financial, or organizational) that could affect the independence and 

integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the 

research, the applicant is to provide a specific and robust mitigation plan to 

address each of those conflicts. At a minimum, the applicant is expected to 
NIJ-2017-11610

26

explain the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place,

or will put in place, to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) 

any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period 

of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may 

include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding 

organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no 

guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed.

OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on 

considerations such as the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify factors that 

could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the applicant entity 

(and any subrecipients) in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation 

activity; and the adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed remedies to control 

any such factors.

How to Apply

Applicants must register in, and submit applications through Grants.gov, a primary source to 

find federal funding opportunities and apply for funding. Find complete instructions on how to 

register and submit an application at www.Grants.gov. Applicants that experience technical 

difficulties during this process should call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800-518-

4726 or 606–545–5035, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on federal 

holidays.

Registering with Grants.gov is a one-time process; however, processing delays may occur,

and it can take several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation of registration 

and a user password. OJP encourages applicants to register several weeks before the 

application submission deadline. In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications at 

least 72 hours prior to the application due date, in order to allow time for the applicant to receive 

validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

OJP strongly encourages all prospective applicants to sign up for Grants.gov email notifications

regarding this solicitation. If this solicitation is cancelled or modified, individuals who sign up with 

Grants.gov for updates will be automatically notified.

Browser Information: Grants.gov was built to be compatible with Internet Explorer. For 

technical assistance with Google Chrome, or another browser, contact Grants.gov Customer 

Support.

Note on Attachments. Grants.gov has two categories of files for attachments: “mandatory” and

“optional.” OJP receives all files attached in both categories. Please ensure that all required 

documents are attached in either Grants.gov category.

Note on File Names and File Types: Grants.gov only permits the use of certain specific

characters in file names of attachments. Valid file names may include only the characters shown 

in the table below. Grants.gov rejects any application that includes an attachment(s) with a file 

name that contains any characters not shown in the table below. Grants.gov forwards

successfully-submitted applications to the OJP Grants Management System (GMS).
NIJ-2017-11610

27

Characters Special Characters

Upper case (A – Z) Parenthesis ( ) Curly braces { } Square brackets [ ]

Lower case (a – z) Ampersand (&) Tilde (~) Exclamation point (!)

Underscore (__) Comma ( , ) Semicolon ( ; ) Apostrophe ( ‘ )

Hyphen ( - ) At sign (@) Number sign (#) Dollar sign ($)

Space Percent sign (%) Plus sign (+) Equal sign (=)

Period (.) When using the ampersand (&) in XML, applicants must use the 

“&” format.

GMS does not accept executable file types as application attachments. These disallowed 

file types include, but are not limited to, the following extensions: “.com,” “.bat,” “.exe,” “.vbs,”

“.cfg,” “.dat,” “.db,” “.dbf,” “.dll,” “.ini,” “.log,” “.ora,” “.sys,” and “.zip.” GMS may reject applications 

with files that use these extensions. It is important to allow time to change the type of file(s) if 

the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps:

Every applicant entity must comply with all applicable System for Award Management (SAM) 

and unique entity identifier (currently, a Data Universal Numbering System [“DUNS”] number) 

requirements. If an applicant entity has not fully complied with applicable SAM and unique 

identifier requirements by the time OJP makes award decisions, OJP may determine that the 

applicant is not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for 

making the award to a different applicant.

An individual who wishes to apply in his/her personal capacity should search Grants.gov for 

funding opportunities for which individuals are eligible to apply. Use the Funding Opportunity 

Number (FON) to register. (An applicant applying as an individual must comply with all 

applicable Grants.gov individual registration requirements.)

Complete the registration form at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/IndCPRegister to create a 

username and password for Grants.gov. (An applicant applying as an individual should 

complete all steps except 1, 2 and 4.)

1. Acquire a unique entity identifier (currently, a DUNS number). In general, the Office of 

Management and Budget requires every applicant for a federal award (other than an 

individual) to include a "unique entity identifier" in each application, including an application 

for a supplemental award. Currently, a DUNS number is the required unique entity identifier.

A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit identification number provided by the commercial 

company Dun and Bradstreet. This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and 

to validate address and point of contact information for applicants, recipients, and 

subrecipients. It will be used throughout the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS 

number is a free, one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a 

DUNS number or apply online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 

1-2 business days.

2. Acquire registration with the System for Award Management (SAM). SAM is the 

repository for certain standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, 

recipients, and subrecipients. All applicants for OJP awards (other than individuals) must 

maintain current registrations in the SAM database. An applicant must be registered in SAM

to successfully register in Grants.gov. Each applicant must update or renew its SAM 
NIJ-2017-11610

28

registration at least annually to maintain an active status. SAM registration and renewal 

can take as long as 10 business days to complete.

An application cannot be successfully submitted in Grants.gov until Grants.gov receives the 

SAM registration information. Once the SAM registration/renewal is complete, the 

information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take as long as 48 hours. OJP 

recommends that the applicant register or renew registration with SAM as early as possible.

Information about SAM registration procedures can be accessed at www.sam.gov.

3. Acquire an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) and a Grants.gov 

username and password. Complete the AOR profile on Grants.gov and create a username 

and password. An applicant entity’s "unique entity identifier" (DUNS number) must be used 

to complete this step. For more information about the registration process for organizations 

and other entities, go to www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html. Individuals registering 

with Grants.gov should go to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/individualregistration.html.

4. Acquire confirmation for the AOR from the E-Business Point of Contact (E-Biz POC).

The E-Biz POC at the applicant organization must log into Grants.gov to “confirm” the 

applicant organization’s AOR. The E-Biz POC will need the Marketing Partner Identification 

Number (MPIN) password obtained when registering with SAM to complete this step. Note 

that an organization can have more than one AOR.

5. Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov. Use the following identifying 

information when searching for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov. The Catalog of 

Federal Domestic Assistance (“CFDA”) number for this solicitation is 16.560, titled “National 

Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development Project Grants” and the funding 

opportunity number is NIJ-2017-11610.

6. Submit a valid application consistent with this solicitation by following the directions 

in Grants.gov. Within 24-48 hours after submitting the electronic application, the applicant 

should receive two notifications from Grants.gov. The first will confirm the receipt of the 

application. The second will state whether the application has been validated and 

successfully submitted, or whether it has been rejected due to errors, with an explanation. It 

is possible to first receive a message indicating that the application is received, and then 

receive a rejection notice a few minutes or hours later. Submitting an application well ahead 

of the deadline provides time to correct the problem(s) that caused the rejection. Important:

OJP urges each applicant to submit its application at least 72 hours prior to the application 

due date, to allow time to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from 

Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a 

rejection notification. Applications must be successfully submitted through Grants.gov by 

11:59 p.m. eastern time on February 27, 2017.

Click here for further details on DUNS numbers, SAM, and Grants.gov registration steps and 

timeframes.

Note: Application Versions

If an applicant submits multiple versions of the same application, OJP will review only the most 

recent system-validated version submitted.
NIJ-2017-11610

29

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

An applicant that experiences unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond its control that 

prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline may contact the Grants.gov Customer 

Support Hotline or the SAM Help Desk (Federal Service Desk) to report the technical issue and 

receive a tracking number. The applicant must e-mail the NIJ contact identified in the Contact 

Information section on the title page within 24 hours after the application deadline to request 

approval to submit its application after the deadline. The applicant’s e-mail must describe the 

technical difficulties, and must include a timeline of the applicant’s submission efforts, the 

complete grant application, the applicant’s DUNS number, and any Grants.gov Help Desk or 

SAM tracking number(s).

Note: OJP does not automatically approve requests to submit a late application. After 

OJP reviews the applicant’s request, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to verify 

the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late 

application has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application 

submission was due to the applicant’s failure to follow all required procedures, OJP will deny the 

applicant’s request to submit its application.

The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions:

 Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time (SAM registration and renewal 

can take as long as 10 business days to complete. The information transfer from SAM to 

Grants.gov can take up to 48 hours.)

 Failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its 

website.

 Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation.

 Technical issues with the applicant’s computer or information technology environment, 

such as issues with firewalls or browser incompatibility.

Notifications regarding known technical problems with Grants.gov, if any, are posted at 

the top of the OJP Funding Resource Center web page.

E. Application Review Information

Review Criteria

Applications that meet basic minimum requirements will be evaluated by peer reviewers using 

the following review criteria.

Statement of the Problem (Understanding of the problem and its importance) – 10%

1. Demonstrated understanding of the need to determine and employ best processes for a 

procedure currently used by a forensic science field/discipline.

2. Demonstrated awareness of the state of current protocols widely used by the forensic

science community within the proposed forensic science discipline of the application.
NIJ-2017-11610

30

Project Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit) – 50%

1. Soundness of methods and analytic and technical approach to addressing the stated 

aim(s) of the proposed project. The overall strategy, methodology, and analyses should 

be well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project.

2. Feasibility of proposed project. Detailed description and justification of the sample type 

and sample size to be tested and approaches for data analysis are thorough and 

appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project.

3. Awareness of potential pitfalls of proposed project design and feasibility of proposed 

actions to minimize and/or mitigate them.

Potential Impact – 15%

Potential for a significant scientific or technical advance(s) that will improve criminal/juvenile

justice in the United States, such as:

1. Potential to determine and increase the awareness of best practices for the evaluation 

and interpretation of physical evidence for the forensic science community.

2. Potential to improve the understanding of the scientific rationale underpinning existing 

laboratory processes.

3. Potential for innovative protocols to increase the efficiency, accuracy, reliability or costeffectiveness for the analysis and interpretation of physical evidence.

Capabilities/Competencies (Capabilities, demonstrated productivity, and experience of the 

applicant organization and proposed project staff) – 20%

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (that is, the principal investigator, 

any and all co-principal investigators, and all other individuals (and organizations) 

identified in the application (regardless of “investigator” status) who will be significantly 

involved in substantive aspects of the proposal).

2. Demonstrated ability of the applicant organization to manage the effort.

3. Relationship between the capabilities/competencies of the proposed project staff 

(including the applicant organization) and the scope of the proposed project.

4. Strength of the scientific environment (e.g., laboratory support, equipment and other 

physical resources, or collaborative arrangements) in which the work will be done and its 

contribution to the probability of success.

Budget

In addition peer reviewers will consider and may comment on the following additional items in 

the context of scientific and technical merit.

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit (cost effectiveness).

2. Appropriateness of the budget relative to the level of effort.
NIJ-2017-11610

31

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs.

4. Alignment of the proposed budget with proposed project activities.

5. Proposed plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, 

such as criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from 

the planned scholarly products of the project.

Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the proposed project) – 5%

Peer reviewers should comment—in the context of scientific and technical merit—on the 

proposed plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, such as 

criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers as well as practitioners in other, related 

fields, summary information from the planned scholarly products of the project.

Review Process

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for making awards. NIJ reviews the 

application to make sure that the information presented is reasonable, understandable, 

measurable, and achievable, as well as consistent with the solicitation.

Peer reviewers will review the applications submitted under this solicitation that meet basic 

minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether an application meets basic 

minimum requirements and should proceed to further consideration, OJP screens applications 

for compliance with those requirements. Although specific requirements may vary, the following 

are common requirements applicable to all solicitations for funding under OJP programs:

 The application must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant.

 The application must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if 

applicable).

 The application must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation.

 The application must include all items designated as “critical elements.”

 The applicant must not be identified in SAM as excluded from receiving federal 

awards.

For a list of the critical elements for this solicitation, see “What an Application Should Include” 

under Section D. Application and Submission Information.

Peer review panels will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum 

requirements. NIJ may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, 

to assess applications on technical merit using the solicitation’s review criteria. An external peer

reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given solicitation who is not a current DOJ 

employee. An internal reviewer is a current DOJ employee who is well-versed or has expertise 

in the subject matter of this solicitation. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting 

recommendations are advisory only, although reviewer views are considered carefully. Other 

important considerations for NIJ include underserved populations, geographic diversity, 
NIJ-2017-11610

32

strategic priorities, and available funding, as well as the planned scholarly products and the 

extent to which the budget detail worksheet and budget narrative accurately explain project 

costs that are reasonable, necessary, and otherwise allowable under federal law and applicable 

federal cost principles.

Pursuant to the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before award decisions are made, OJP also 

reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things to 

help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory 

record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the 

applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. In addition, if OJP 

anticipates that an award will exceed $150,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and 

consider any information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the 

integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee 

Performance and Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS").

Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any 

information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding 

agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other 

information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by applicants."

The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a 

framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants for competitive awards. OJP takes into 

account information pertinent to matters such as—

1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity.

2. Quality of the management systems of the applicant, and applicant’s ability to meet 

prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial 

Guide.

3. Applicant’s history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including scholarly 

products, and compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as 

awards from other federal agencies.

4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the Part 200 

Uniform Requirements

5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively 

implement other award requirements

All final award decisions will be made by the Director of the National Institute of Justice, who

may take into account not only peer review ratings and NIJ recommendations, but also other 

factors as indicated in this section. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations for award 

recommendations and decisions may include, but are not limited to, planned scholarly products, 

proposed budgets, past performance (including scholarly products) under prior NIJ and OJP 

awards, research independence and integrity, strategic priorities, and available funding when 

making awards.
NIJ-2017-11610

33

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Award notifications will be made by September 30, 2017. OJP sends award notifications by 

email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the 

authorizing official (E-Biz POC and AOR). The email notification includes detailed instructions 

on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award 

acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on 

the award date.

For each successful applicant, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant 

will be required to login; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances; 

designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award 

conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires physical 

signature of the award document by the authorized representative and the scanning of the fullyexecuted award document to OJP.

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements

If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the OJPapproved application, the recipient must comply with all award conditions, as well as all 

applicable requirements of federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders (including 

applicable requirements referred to in the assurances and certifications executed in connection

with award acceptance). OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information 

on post-award legal requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an 

application.

Applicants should consult the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements”, available in the OJP Funding Resource Center. In

addition, applicants should examine the following two legal documents, as each successful 

applicant must execute both documents before it may receive any award funds.

 Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements.

 Standard Assurances.

Applicants may view these documents in the Apply section of the OJP Funding Resource 

Center.

The web pages accessible through the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable 

to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements” are intended to give applicants for OJP awards a 

general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that apply to many (or 

in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY 2017. Individual 

OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those additional conditions 

may relate to the particular statute, program, or solicitation under which the award is made; to 

the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under other federal 

awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other pertinent 

considerations.
NIJ-2017-11610

34

General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

In addition to the deliverables and expected scholarly products described in Section A. Program 

Description, any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the 

following reports and data.

Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual

progress reports, final financial and progress reports, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in 

accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Applicants 

should anticipate that progress reports will be required to follow the non-budgetary components 

of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) template/format. General information on 

RPPRs may be found at www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rppr/. Future awards and fund drawdowns 

may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, OJP may require additional 

reports.)

Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific 

circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and 

administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP 

award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal 

government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the

award condition posted on the OJP web site at http://ojp.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm.

Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, each recipient of an award 

under this solicitation also must provide data that measure the results of the work done under 

the award. To demonstrate program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ with 

fulfilling its responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 

(GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, 

OJP will require any recipient, post award, to provide the data listed as “Data Recipient 

Provides” in the performance measures table in Section A. Program Description, under 

"Performance Measures," so that OJP can calculate values for this solicitation's performance 

measures.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

For questions directed to the Federal Awarding Agency, see the title page.

For contact information for Grants.gov, see the title page.

H. Other Information

Provide Feedback to OJP

Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a)

All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the 

federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold 

information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the 

responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one 

of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant 

to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application.
NIJ-2017-11610

35

In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in 

those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory 

exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and 

names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate 

circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicant/recipient that submitted a responsive 

document.

For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a 

nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that 

involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicant/recipient that submitted the 

application and ask it to identify — quite precisely — any particular information in the application 

that applicant/recipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it believes 

applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicant/recipient, OJP makes an 

independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a similar 

process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement 

sensitive information.

Provide Feedback to OJP

To assist OJP in improving its application and award processes, OJP encourages applicants to 

provide feedback on this solicitation, the application submission process, and/or the application 

review process. Provide feedback to OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov.

IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for feedback and suggestions only. OJP does not send replies from 

this mailbox to messages it receives in this mailbox. Any prospective applicant that has specific 

questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation must use the appropriate 

telephone number or e-mail listed on the front of this solicitation document to obtain information. 

These contacts are provided to help ensure that prospective applicants can directly reach an 

individual who can address specific questions in a timely manner.

If you are interested in being a reviewer for other OJP grant applications, please e-mail your 

resume to ojppeerreview@lmsolas.com. (Do not send your resume to the OJP Solicitation 

Feedback email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization or entity 

can be a peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization/entity has submitted 

an application.
NIJ-2017-11610

36

Application Checklist

Research and Evaluation for the Testing and Interpretation of Physical Evidence 

in Publicly Funded Forensic Laboratories

This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application.

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 27)

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 27)

To Register with Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 28)

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 28)

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 28)

_____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 28)

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 26)

_____ Read Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov

_____ Read OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting

available at ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm

(see page 11)

After Application Submission, Receive Grants.gov Email Notifications That:

_____ (1) Application has been received

_____ (2) Application has either been successfully validated or rejected with errors

(see page 28)

If no Grants.gov receipt, and validation or error notifications are received:

_____ See NCJRS contact information on the title page

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements:

_____ Review the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and 

Cooperative Agreements " in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Scope Requirement:

_____ The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s) of $3,000,000.

Eligibility Requirement:

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 12)

_____ Project Abstract (see page 12)

_____ Program Narrative (critical element) (see page 13)

_____ Appendices (see page 16)

_____ Bibliography/references

_____ Any tools/instruments, questionnaires, tables/charts/graphs, or maps pertaining 

to the proposed study that supplement those in the narrative
NIJ-2017-11610

37

_____ Curriculum vitae or resumes of the principal investigator and any and all coprincipal investigators (critical element)

_____ List (to the extent known) of all proposed project staff members

_____ Proposed project timeline and expected milestones

_____ Human Subjects Protection Paperwork

_____ Privacy Certificate

_____ List of any previous and current NIJ awards to applicant organization and 

investigator(s)

_____ Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project, or letters of intent to establish agreements (if 

applicable)

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (critical element) (see page 18)

_____ Budget Narrative (critical element) (see page 19)

_____ Proof of Forensic Laboratory Accreditation (critical element) (see page 21)

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 21)

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 22)

_____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire

(see page 22)

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 23)

_____ Additional Attachments

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 23)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 24)

_____ Request and Justification for Employee Compensation Waiver (if applicable)

(see page 10)