U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

National Institute of Justice 

The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice 

is seeking applications for funding social science research in forensic science. This 

program furthers the Department’s mission by sponsoring research to provide objective, 

independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime and 

justice, particularly at the State and local levels. 

Solicitation: 

Social Science Research in Forensic Science 

Eligibility 

(See “Eligibility,” page 4) 

Deadline 

Registration with Grants.gov is required prior to application submission. 

(See “Registration,” page 3) 

All applications are due April 13, 2009, 11:59 p.m. eastern time. 

Contact Information 

For assistance with the requirements of this solicitation, contact Katharine Browning, 

Senior Social Science Analyst, at 202–616–4786 or katharine.browning@usdoj.gov. For 

questions specific to the rape kit sections, please contact Bethany Backes, Social 

Science Analyst, at 202–305–4419 or bethany.backes@usdoj.gov. 

This application must be submitted through Grants.gov. For technical assistance with 

submitting the application, call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 

1–800–518–4726 or send an e-mail to support@grants.gov. 

Note: The Grants.gov Support Hotline hours of operation are Monday–Friday 

from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. eastern time. 

Grants.gov Funding Opportunity No. NIJ–2009–2009 

SL# 000865 
CONTENTS 

Overview ........................................................................................................................... 3
 

Deadline: Registration....................................................................................................... 3 

Deadline: Application ........................................................................................................ 3 

Eligibility ............................................................................................................................ 4 

Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations ................................................ 4 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Tribes and/or Tribal Organizations.... 5 

Specific Information ........................................................................................................... 5 

Performance Measures ..................................................................................................... 9 

How to Apply................................................................................................................... 10 

What an Application Must Include................................................................................... 11 

Selection Criteria............................................................................................................. 14 

Review Process .............................................................................................................. 15 

Additional Requirements................................................................................................. 16 

2
 
Social Science Research in Forensic Science
 CFDA No. 16.560 

Overview 

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the research, development, and evaluation 

agency of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and a component of the Office of 

Justice Programs (OJP). NIJ provides objective, independent, evidence-based 

knowledge and tools to enhance the administration of justice and public safety. NIJ 

solicits applications to inform its search for the knowledge and tools to guide policy and 

practice. 

Forensic science, particularly in the area of DNA, has experienced numerous advances 

over the last decade. Improvements in science and technology have increased 

capabilities to use DNA in terms of the amount of evidence needed to obtain DNA, the 

speed of DNA processing, and the range of crimes DNA can help solve. NIJ is interested 

in stimulating research to examine the impact of these forensic advances on the criminal 

justice system as well as the impact of changes in policies to adapt to the more 

widespread use of DNA. 

Deadline: Registration 

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

occur and it can take up to several weeks for first-time registrants to receive 

confirmations/user passwords. OJP highly recommends that applicants start the 

registration process as early as possible to prevent delays in submitting an application 

package to our agency by the application deadline specified. The registration process for 

organizations involves these steps: (1) Obtain a Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) number; (2) Register your organization with the Central Contractor Registration 

(CCR) database; (3) Register with Grants.gov’s Credential Provider and obtain a 

username and password; (4) Register with Grants.gov to establish yourself as an 

Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (5) The E-Business Point of 

Contact (POC) assigns the “Authorized Applicant Role” to you. For more information 

about the registration process, go to www.grants.gov. Note: Your CCR must be 

renewed once a year. Failure to renew the CCR may prohibit submission of a grant 

application through Grants.gov. 

Deadline: Application 

The due date for applying for funding under this announcement is April 13, 2009, 

11:59 p.m. eastern time. 

Within 24 to 48 hours after submitting your electronic application, you should receive an 

e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The validation message will tell you whether 

the application has been received and validated or has been rejected, and why. 

3
 
Important: You are urged to submit your application at least 72 hours prior to the due 

date of the application to allow time to receive the validation message and to correct any 

problems that may have caused the rejection notification. 

If you experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond your control, you must 

contact OJP staff within 24 hours after the due date and request approval to submit 

your application. At that time, OJP staff will require you to e-mail the complete grant 

application along with your DUNS number and provide a Grants.gov Help Desk tracking 

number(s). After OJP reviews all of the information submitted and contacts Grants.gov to 

validate the technical issues reported by the applicant, OJP will contact you to either 

approve or deny the request. 

To ensure a fair competition for limited discretionary funds, the following conditions are 

not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) failure to begin the registration process 

in sufficient time; (2) failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply 

as posted on its website; (3) failure to follow all of the instructions in the OJP solicitation; 

and (4) technical issues experienced with the applicant’s computer or information 

technology (IT) environment. 

Notifications regarding known technical problems with Grants.gov are posted on the OJP 

funding Web page, www.ojp.gov/funding/solicitations.htm. 

Eligibility 

In general, NIJ is authorized to make grants to, or enter into contracts or cooperative 

agreements with, States (including territories), local governments (including federally 

recognized Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions), nonprofit 

and profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit and profit organizations), institutions of 

higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education), and certain qualified 

individuals. Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and foreign institutions of higher 

education are not eligible to apply. 

Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations: Consistent with Executive Order 

13279, dated December 12, 2002, and 28 C.F.R. Part 38, faith-based and other 

community organizations that statutorily qualify as eligible applicants under DOJ 

programs are invited and encouraged to apply for assistance awards to fund eligible 

grant activities. Faith-based and other community organizations will be considered for 

awards on the same basis as other eligible applicants and, if they receive assistance 

awards, will be treated on an equal basis with all other grantees in the administration of 

such awards. No eligible applicant or grantee will be discriminated for or against on the 

basis of its religious character or affiliation, religious name, or the religious composition 

of its board of directors or persons working in the organization. 

Faith-based organizations receiving DOJ assistance awards retain their independence 

and do not lose or have to modify their religious identity (e.g., remove religious symbols) 

to receive assistance awards. DOJ grant funds, however, may not be used to fund any 

inherently religious activity, such as prayer or worship. Inherently religious activity is 

permissible, although it cannot occur during an activity funded with DOJ grant funds; 

rather, such religious activity must be separate in time or place from the DOJ-funded 

program. Further, participation in such activity by individuals receiving services must be 

4
 
voluntary. Programs funded by DOJ are not permitted to discriminate in the provision of 

services on the basis of a beneficiary’s religion. 

If your organization is a faith-based organization that makes hiring decisions on the 

basis of religious belief, it may be entitled, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 

42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, to receive Federal funds and yet maintain that hiring practice, even 

if the law creating the funding program contains a general ban on religious discrimination 

in employment. For the circumstances under which this may occur, and the certifications 

that may be required, please see the section titled “Funding to Faith-Based 

Organizations” on the "Other Requirements for OJP Applications" Web page at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

Applicants are also encouraged to review the “Civil Rights Compliance” section of the 

“Other Requirements for OJP Applications” Web page, which also can be found at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Tribes and/or Tribal Organizations: If a 

grant application is being submitted on behalf of a tribe or tribal organization, a current 

authorizing resolution of the governing body of the tribal entity or other enactment of the 

tribal council or comparable government body authorizing the inclusion of the tribe or 

tribal organization named in the application must be included with the application. 

Specific Information—Social Science Research in 

Forensic Science 

Forensic science has experienced numerous advances over the last decade, particularly 

in the area of DNA. Improvements in science and technology have increased the 

capabilities of using DNA in terms of the amount of evidence needed to obtain DNA, the 

speed of DNA processing, and the range of crimes DNA can help solve. As the use of 

DNA evidence increases, backlogs in crime laboratories and property rooms may 

develop. Thus, there is a need for research examining the impact of these forensic DNA 

advances on the criminal justice system as well as the impact of changes in policies to 

adapt to the greater use of DNA. 

NIJ has identified several specific areas of interest for this solicitation: (1) the rape kit 

backlog in the United States, (2) rape kit reporting practices, and (3) arrestees in DNA 

databases. Within each of these areas of interest, NIJ has proposed specific research 

questions, but applicants may propose other research questions that address the area of 

interest. Research proposed under this solicitation should have direct implications for 

policy and/or practice for DNA forensics in the criminal justice system, and these 

implications should be clearly stated in the application. 

The Rape Kit Backlog in the United States 

As sexual assault forensic evidence collection practices have advanced and been 

adopted by jurisdictions throughout the country, the “rape kit” has emerged as the field’s 

primary forensic evidence collection tool in sexual assault cases. Jurisdictions “use 

these kits to collect such evidence as foreign materials on the body, hair, oral and 

anogenital swabs and smears, body swabs, and blood or saliva samples for DNA 

analysis and comparison from a victim’s body after they report the assault.” This 

5
 
collected evidence is intended to assist in the investigation and prosecution of crimes of 

sexual violence, hold offenders accountable, and prevent additional victimizations.1

 In 

recent years, there have been concentrated efforts and new resources designed to 

reduce the Nation’s backlog in untested rape kits (referred to herein as the “rape kit 

backlog”). Policymakers, the media, and criminal justice practitioner groups have 

expressed concern that in spite of these efforts and resources, the national rape kit 

backlog remains formidable, and, according to some, may have actually increased. 

Accurate information about this backlog and the rape kits themselves is lacking. The law 

enforcement, forensic, policy, and victim advocacy communities currently do not fully 

understand the nature of this backlog. In particular, we do not currently know if the 

backlog primarily consists of cases whose outcomes would hinge on the presence of 

DNA or other forensic evidence. If not, the impact of this backlog on case processing 

and the provision of justice to victims would not be as significant. However, if the 

national backlog does consist of cases in which case processing and outcomes rely on 

DNA evidence, then policymakers and criminal justice professionals would be justified in 

devoting additional resources and expanding the national rape kit backlog reduction 

strategy beyond its current limits. 

To expand our knowledge of the national rape kit backlog and inform policy in this arena, 

NIJ is calling for the submission of applications that focus on this understudied criminal 

justice area. Priority research areas include studies that: 

•	 Explore the nature of the current rape kit backlog in the United States, including 

the types of sexual assault cases that populate this backlog (e.g., stranger vs. 

nonstranger), and determine whether the evidence contained in these kits would 

have value in the processing and adjudication of these cases if analyzed. 

Applicants are encouraged to develop projects that incorporate a multisite 

design. 

•	 Examine the costs and benefits of applying forensic laboratory resources to 

reduce the rape kit backlogs in public crime laboratories and police agencies 

around the country and the effect of such investment on case outcomes. 

•	 Explore the scientific and evidentiary value of specific items collected through 

rape kits as well as the best protocols and techniques to collect them from 

suspected victims and perpetrators of sexual violence. 

Rape Kit Reporting Practices 

Pursuant to the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act 

of 2005 ("VAWA 2005"), 42 U.S.C. § 3796gg-4(d), States that receive money under the 

STOP Violence Against Women formula grant program may not require a victim of 

sexual assault to participate in the criminal justice system or otherwise cooperate with 

law enforcement in order to receive a free or reimbursable forensic medical examination. 

To be eligible to receive STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grants, all States 

must comply with this new requirement by January 2009. 

Prior to the recent reauthorization, some jurisdictions have been offering a “Jane Doe 

Kit,” which provides the victim with anonymity. The new VAWA 2005 requirement 

1

 National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations: Adults/Adolescents, NCJ 206554. 

Kristin Littel; OVW, September 2004. 

6
 
mandates that States provide a kit regardless of victim cooperation with the criminal 

justice system, but does not necessarily require anonymity in the reporting, storage, or 

retention practices. Jurisdictions that have been providing “Jane Doe Kits” claim that the 

anonymity encourages more victims to come forward and have forensic evidence 

collected and preserved and empowers victims to cooperate with the criminal justice 

system on their own volition. It is expected that the new VAWA 2005 requirement will 

have the same effect. 

To assess the impact of anonymous reporting and the potential impacts the new VAWA 

2005 requirement may have, NIJ is interested in studying current practices, policies, and 

outcomes in jurisdictions that have adopted anonymous reporting and those that are 

beginning to adopt the new VAWA 2005 requirement. NIJ anticipates that the research 

will provide useful information to jurisdictions that are implementing anonymous 

reporting, the VAWA 2005 requirement, or both. Priority research areas include studies 

that: 

•	 Examine how jurisdictions that have allowed anonymous reporting handle 

evidence collection and retention, and determine the role that collection and 

retention play in case outcomes (i.e., Does the retention period for evidence 

allow adequate time for a victim to come forward? What are the effects of 

different evidence retention policies? What is the impact of this policy on already 

existing rape kit backlogs in crime laboratories and property rooms?). 

•	 Analyze practices, victim reporting, and case outcomes among jurisdictions 

implementing the VAWA 2005 requirement, those that have been practicing rape 

kit anonymity, and those who have not implemented either intervention. 

Arrestees in DNA databases 

DNA evidence is a widely accepted investigative tool that is used to identify the 

perpetrators of violent crimes and, increasingly, property crimes. Much of the power of 

this tool is dependent upon having a large number of convicted offender DNA profiles in 

the CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) database. Every State currently requires that 

people convicted of certain felonies provide a sample of their blood or saliva so their 

DNA profiles can be put into a database of convicted felons. Most States collect DNA 

from all convicted felons. At least 11 States have gone beyond convicted offenders and 

have some process for collecting DNA from arrestees for certain types of offenses. 

Some States are just beginning to collect samples from arrestees, and some have 

policies that have been in operation for several years. 

There are two main arguments made for adding arrestees DNA profiles to these 

databases. First, increasing the number of people included in the databases will lead to 

an increase in the number of “hits” to evidence from crime scenes, and thus an increase 

in the number of crimes solved. Second, collecting samples from people at the time of 

arrest, rather than conviction, will prevent crime as these samples are entered into the 

database and lead to an earlier identification. These gains obviously come with some 

costs, as States have to implement new procedures to obtain samples from arrestees 

and may run into new legal and logistical challenges not encountered with convicted 

offenders. 

7
 
NIJ is interested in research that examines the impacts of adding arrestee profiles to 

State DNA databases, both in terms of the logistical issues encountered in the process 

and the types of offenders that have been added to the database as a result. Possible 

research questions include: 

•	 Have States in which arrestee profiles have been added to the DNA database 

increased the number of DNA hits, suspects identified, and/or crimes solved? 

•	 How do arrestees whose profiles are added to the database differ from the 

convicted offenders? Does collecting samples from people at the time of arrest 

actually prevent crime? 

•	 What are the costs involved in adding arrestee profiles and how do these costs 

compare to the yield of increasing DNA hits? Is there a point of diminishing 

returns? 

•	 What are the policy differences among States moving to inclusion of arrestees 

(i.e., right to refuse to provide a DNA sample, expungement, types of offenses 

included, etc.) and what are the outcomes of the various policies? 

Evaluation Research: Within applications proposing evaluation research, funding 

priority will be given to experimental research designs that use random selection and 

assignment of participants to experimental and control conditions. When randomized 

designs are not feasible, priority will be given to quasi-experimental designs that include 

contemporary procedures like Propensity Score Matching and Regression Discontinuity 

Design to address selection bias in evaluating outcomes and impacts. 

Evaluations that also include measurements of program fidelity and implementation as 

part of a thorough process assessment are desirable. Measurements of program fidelity 

should be included as part of an assessment of program processes and operations to 

ensure that policies, programs, and technologies are implemented as designed. As one 

aspect of a comprehensive evaluation, assessments of program processes should 

include objective measurements and qualitative observations of programs as they are 

actually implemented and services are delivered. These may include assessment of 

such aspects as adherence to program content and protocol, quantity and duration, 

quality of delivery, and participant responsiveness. 

Proposed evaluation research designs with multiple units of analysis and multiple 

measurements will also be given priority. Design aspects that contribute to the validity of 

results are necessary to effectively address issues of generalizability and 

representativeness of findings. 

Finally, applications that include additional costs/benefits analysis will be given priority. 

Costs/benefits analysis is viewed by NIJ as an effective way to communicate and 

disseminate findings from evaluation research. 

Please note: All applicants under this solicitation must comply with Department of 

Justice regulations on confidentiality and human subjects protection. See “Other 

Requirements for OJP Applications” at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

8
 
What will not be funded: 

1. Provision of training or direct service. 

2. Proposals primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (Your budget may 

include these items if they are necessary to conduct applied research, development, 

demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.) 

3. Work that will be funded under another specific solicitation. 

Cost of proposed work: NIJ anticipates that up to a total of up to $2,000,000 may 

become available for awards made through this solicitation. All NIJ awards are subject 

to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional 

requirements that may be imposed by law. NIJ expects to make up to two to eight 

awards depending on funds available, the number of high-quality applications, and other 

pertinent factors. If you propose a project that exceeds the amount of money that may 

be available for this solicitation, we recommend that you divide the project into phases, 

stages, or tasks so that NIJ can consider making an award for a specific portion of the 

work. NIJ cannot guarantee that subsequent phases, stages, or tasks will be funded. 

Such additional funding depends on, among other things, NIJ resources, strategic 

priorities, and your satisfactory completion of each phase, stage, or task. Note: 

Deliverables (e.g., a final report) will be required at the end of each phase, stage, or 

task. 

Applicants should be aware that the total period for an award, including one that 

receives additional funding, ordinarily will not exceed three years. 

A grant made by NIJ under this solicitation may account for up to 100 percent of the total 

cost of the project. See "Cofunding," under "What an Application Must Include." 

Limitation on use of award funds for employee compensation; waiver: No portion 

of any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation may be used to pay 

any portion of the total cash compensation (salary plus bonuses) of any employee of the 

award recipient whose total cash compensation exceeds 110 percent 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. (The salary table for SES employees is available at http://www.opm.gov.) 

This prohibition may be waived at the discretion of the Assistant Attorney General for the 

Office of Justice Programs. An applicant that wishes to request a waiver should include 

a detailed justification in the budget narrative for the application. The justification should 

include: the particular qualification and expertise of the individual, the uniqueness of the 

service being provided, the individual’s specific knowledge of the program or project 

undertaken with the grant funds and a statement explaining that the individual’s salary is 

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

qualifications and expertise, and for the work that is to be done. 

Performance Measures 

To assist in fulfilling the Department’s responsibilities under the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA), P.L. 103–62, applicants who receive funding 

under this solicitation must provide data that measure the results of their work. 

Performance measures for this solicitation are as follows: 

9
 
Objective Performance Measures Data Grantee Provides 

Develop and analyze information 

and data having clear implications 

for criminal justice policy and 

practice in the United States. 

Relevance to the needs of the 

field as measured by whether the 

grantee’s substantive scope did 

not deviate from the funded 

proposal or any subsequent 

agency modifications to the 

scope. 

Quality of the research as 

assessed by peer reviewers. 

Quality of management as 

measured by whether significant 

interim project milestones were 

achieved, final deadlines were 

met, and costs remained within 

approved limits. 

If applicable, number of NIJ final 

grant reports, NIJ research 

documents, and grantee research 

documents published. 

A final report providing a 

comprehensive overview of the 

project and a detailed description 

of the project design, data, and 

methods; a full presentation of 

scientific findings; and a thorough 

discussion of the implications of 

the project findings for criminal 

justice practice and policy. 

Quarterly financial reports, semiannual progress reports, and a 

final progress report. 

If applicable, each data set that 

was collected, acquired, or 

modified in conjunction with the 

project. 

If applicable, citation to 

report(s)/document(s). 

How to Apply 

DOJ participates in Grants.gov—a “one-stop storefront” that provides a unified process 

for all customers of Federal grants to find funding opportunities and apply for funding. 

Grants.gov Instructions: Complete instructions can be found at www.grants.gov. 

If you experience difficulties at any point during this process, please call the Grants.gov 

Customer Support Hotline at 1–800–518–4726, Monday–Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.
 

eastern time. 

Funding Opportunities With Multiple Purpose Areas: Some OJP solicitations posted 

to Grants.gov contain multiple purpose areas, denoted by the individual Competition ID. 

If you are applying to a solicitation with multiple Competition IDs, you must select the 

appropriate Competition ID for the intended purpose area of your application. The 

application will be peer reviewed according to the requirements of the purpose area 

under which it is submitted. 

Note: OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS) does not support Microsoft Vista 

or Microsoft 2007. Therefore, OJP will not review any application whose 

attachments are in Microsoft Vista or Microsoft 2007 format. GMS downloads 

applications from Grants.gov and is the system in which OJP reviews applications and 

manages awarded grants. Applications submitted via GMS must be in the following 

formats: Microsoft Word (*.doc), Word Perfect (*.wpd), Microsoft Excel (*.xls), PDF files 

(*.pdf), or Text Documents (*.txt). GMS is not yet compatible with Vista and cannot yet 

process Microsoft Word 2007 documents saved in the new default format with the 

extensions of “.docx.” Please ensure the documents you are submitting in Grants.gov 

are saved using “Word 97–2003 Document (*.doc)” format. Additionally, GMS does not 

10
 
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." 

CFDA Number: 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 Grants.gov funding opportunity number is NIJ– 

2009–2009. 

A DUNS number is required: The Office of Management and Budget requires that all 

businesses and nonprofit applicants for Federal funds include a DUNS (Data Universal 

Numeric System) number in their application for a new award or renewal of an award. 

Applications without a DUNS number are incomplete. A DUNS number is a unique ninedigit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and keeping track of 

entities receiving Federal funds. The identifier is used for tracking purposes and to 

validate address and point-of-contact information for Federal assistance applicants, 

recipients, and subrecipients. The DUNS number will be used throughout the grant life 

cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, simple, one-time activity. Obtain one by 

calling 1–866–705–5711 or by applying online at http://www.dnb.com/us. Individuals are 

exempt from this requirement. 

Central Contractor Registration (CCR) is required: In addition to the DUNS number 

requirement, OJP requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for Federal financial 

assistance maintain current registrations in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) 

database. The CCR database is the repository for standard information about Federal 

financial assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. Organizations that have 

previously submitted applications via Grants.gov are already registered with CCR, as it 

is a requirement for Grants.gov registration. Please note, however, that applicants must 

update or renew their CCR at least once per year to maintain an active status. 

Information about registration procedures can be accessed at www.ccr.gov. 

What an Application Must Include 

An application must include the following: 

Standard Form 424 

Program Narrative 

The Program Narrative includes: 

a. Abstract (not to exceed 600 words). 

The abstract should state the problem under investigation (including goals 

and objectives of the proposed project) and the anticipated relevance of 

the project to criminal justice public policy, practice, or theory applicable 

to the United States. It should describe the proposed method and/or 

research design, including data to be used in addressing research 

questions, data collection procedures and instrumentation, access to 

data, and other methods or procedures of the proposed study. It should 

also describe procedures for data analysis and all expected products, 

including interim and final reports, instrumentation, devices, and data sets 

to be submitted in accordance with the Data Archiving Strategy (see 

11
 
below). If applicable, it should describe the subjects who will be involved 

in the proposed project, including the number of participants; participants’ 

age, gender, and race/ethnicity; and other pertinent characteristics, such 

as methods used to gain access to subjects. 

b. Resubmit response (if applicable). 

If you are resubmitting a proposal that was submitted, but not funded, 

under a previous solicitation, you must provide a response indicating that 

your proposal is a revision and that it was submitted before. You should 

prepare a two-page response to the earlier panel review that includes (1) 

the title, submission date, and NIJ-assigned application number of the 

previous proposal, and (2) a brief summary of responses to the review 

and/or revisions to the proposal. Insert the response after the abstract. 

c. Table of contents. 

d. Main body. 

The main body of the Program Narrative should describe the project in 

depth and include the following sections: 

• Purpose, goals, and objectives. 

• Review of relevant literature. 

• Research design and methods. 

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

• Management plan and organization. 

• Dissemination strategy. 

e. Appendixes. 

Appendixes are not counted against program narrative page limit and 

must include: 

• Bibliography/References (if applicable). 

• Data Archiving Strategy (see “Other Program Attachments” below). 

• List of key personnel (required). 

• Résumés of key personnel (required). 

• List of previous and current NIJ awards (required). 

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project (if applicable). 

• Chart for timeline, research calendar, or milestones (required). 

• Other materials required by the solicitation. 

Budget Detail Worksheet 

The Budget Detail Worksheet should address the full scope, duration, and cost of the 

project. The Budget Detail Worksheet should include a breakdown of costs associated 

with each budget category, including itemizations and calculations where necessary. 

The budget must be broken down on a year-by-year basis over the length of the project. 

That is, if the proposed project is 3 years, then there should be a separate budget for 

year one, year two, and year three. 

Templates for filling out the Budget Detail Worksheet may be found online at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms/budget_detail.pdf, OJP Standard Forms & 

Instructions. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer's Customer Service Center at 1–800–458–0786. 

12
 
Budget Narrative 

The Budget Narrative is a plain language description of each of the proposed 

expenditures listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. It should clearly explain the purpose 

and reason for all expenditures in the budget. There should be no ambiguities about any 

budget item. The narrative should also include details for calculated rates or other 

figures. 

As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative must be broken down on a 

year-by-year basis. 

Indirect Rate Agreement (if applicable) 

Applicants that do not have a federally negotiated indirect cost rate and wish to establish 

one can submit a proposal to their “cognizant” Federal agency. Generally, the cognizant 

Federal agency is the agency that provides the preponderance of direct Federal funding. 

This can be determined by reviewing an organization’s schedule of Federal financial 

assistance. If DOJ is your cognizant Federal agency, obtain information needed to 

submit an indirect cost rate proposal at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/part3/part3chap17.htm. 

Other Program Attachments 

These include several forms, available on OJP’s funding page at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms.htm. 

Data Archiving Strategy: NIJ requires that each data set resulting from funded 

research be submitted as a grant product or deliverable for archiving with the National 

Archive of Criminal Justice Data. (Data sets are to be submitted 90 days before the end 

of the project period.) Applications for NIJ research grants must include a brief (one- or 

two-page) data archiving strategy. For purposes of research replication and extension, 

the inclusion of only the final data set often prevents other researchers from replicating 

or extending the study because there are no original data, intermediate data, or 

documentation detailing how the data changed throughout the project. This data 

archiving strategy therefore must briefly describe the— 

•	 Anticipated manipulations of original, intermediate, and final data sets (as 

applicable).
 

•	 Methods of documentation of such manipulations. 

•	 Preparation of original, intermediate, and final data sets for archive submission. 

The data archiving strategy should be submitted as an appendix to the application and 

will NOT count toward the 30-page limit. Please label this appendix “Data Archiving 

Strategy.” 

Page limit: The program narrative section of your application must not exceed 30 

double-spaced pages in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. Abstract, resubmit response, 

table of contents, charts, figures, appendixes, and government forms do not count 

toward the 30-page limit for the narrative section. 

Cofunding: A grant made by NIJ under this solicitation may account for up to 100 

percent of the total cost of the project. You must indicate whether you believe it is 

feasible for you to contribute cash, facilities, or services as non-Federal support for the 

13
 
project. Your application should identify generally any such contributions that you expect 

to make and your proposed budget should indicate in detail which items, if any, will be 

supported with non-Federal contributions. 

Selection Criteria 

Successful applicants must demonstrate the following: 

Statement of the Problem/Program Narrative (Understanding of the problem and its 

importance)—15% 

1. Clarity of problem statement. 

2. Awareness of relevant research. 

3. Connection between proposed research and problem. 

Project/Program Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit)—30% 

1. Awareness of the state of current research or technology. 

2. Soundness of methodology and analytic and technical approach. 

3. Feasibility of proposed project and awareness of pitfalls. 

4. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate). 

Capabilities/Competencies (Capabilities, demonstrated productivity, and experience of 

applicants)—20% 

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed staff. 

2. Demonstrated ability of proposed staff and organization to manage the effort. 

3. Adequacy of the plan to manage the project, including how various tasks are 

subdivided and resources are used. 

4. Successful past performance on NIJ grants and contracts (when applicable). 

Budget—15% 

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit. 

2. Appropriateness of the budget relative to the level of effort. 

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs. 

Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation (Relevance to policy and practice)—15% 

1. Potential for significant advances in scientific or technical understanding of the 

problem. 

2. Potential for significant advances in the field. 

3. Relevance for improving the policy and practice of criminal justice and related 

agencies and improving public safety, security, and quality of life. 

4. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed end products, when applicable 

(e.g., purchase price and maintenance costs for a new technology or cost of 

training to use the technology). 

5. Perceived potential for commercialization and/or implementation of a new 

technology (when applicable). 

14
 
Dissemination Strategy—5% 

1. Well-defined plan for the grant recipient to disseminate results to appropriate 

audiences, including researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. 

2. Suggestions for print and electronic products NIJ might develop for practitioners 

and policymakers. 

Relevance of the project for policy and practice. 

Higher quality applications clearly explain the practical implications of the project. They 

connect technical expertise with criminal justice policy and practice. To ensure that the 

project has strong relevance for policy and practice, some researchers and technologists 

collaborate with practitioners and policymakers. You may include letters showing support 

from practitioners, but they carry less weight than clear evidence that you understand 

why policymakers and practitioners would benefit from your work and how they would 

use it. While a partnership may affect State or local activities, it should also have broader 

implications for others across the country. 

Review Process 

OJP is committed to ensuring a standardized process for awarding grants. NIJ reviews 

the application to make sure that the information presented is reasonable, 

understandable, measurable, achievable, and consistent with program or legislative 

requirements as stated in the solicitation. 

Peer reviewers will be reviewing the applications submitted under this solicitation as 

well. NIJ may use either internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a 

combination of both to review the applications under this solicitation. An external peer 

reviewer is an expert in the field of the subject matter of a given solicitation who is NOT 

a current U.S. Department of Justice employee. An internal reviewer is an expert in the 

field of the subject matter of a given solicitation who is a current U.S. Department of 

Justice employee. Applications will be screened initially to determine whether the 

applicant meets all eligibility requirements. Only applications submitted by eligible 

applicants that meet all other requirements (such as timeliness, proper format, and 

responsiveness to the scope of the solicitation) will be evaluated, scored, and rated by a 

peer review panel. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are 

advisory only. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations may include, but are not 

limited to, underserved populations, strategic priorities, past performance, and available 

funding. 

After the peer review is finalized, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), in 

consultation with NIJ, conducts a financial review of all potential discretionary awards 

and cooperative agreements to evaluate the fiscal integrity and financial capability of 

applicants; examines proposed costs to determine if the budget and budget narrative 

accurately explain project costs; and determines whether costs are reasonable, 

necessary, and allowable under applicable Federal cost principles and agency 

regulations. OCFO also reviews the award document and verifies the OJP Vendor 

Number. 

When awards will be made: All applicants, whether they are accepted or rejected, will 

be notified. The review and approval process takes about 6 months. You should not 

propose to begin work until at least 6 months after the application deadline on the cover 

15
 
of this solicitation. Also, you should not expect to receive notification of a decision for at 

least 6 months after that date. Lists of awards are updated regularly on NIJ’s Web site at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/funding/welcome.htm. 

Absent explicit statutory authorization or written delegation of authority to the contrary, 

all final grant award decisions will be made by the Assistant Attorney General (AAG), 

who may also give consideration to factors including, but not limited to, underserved 

populations, strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding when making 

awards. 

Additional Requirements 

Successful applicants selected for award must agree to comply with additional 

applicable requirements prior to receiving grant funding. We strongly encourage you to 

review the list below pertaining to these additional requirements prior to submitting your 

application. Additional information for each can be found at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

• Civil Rights Compliance 

• Funding to Faith-Based Organizations 

• Confidentiality and Human Subjects Protection 

• Anti-Lobbying Act 

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements 

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

• DOJ Information Technology Standards 

• Single Point of Contact Review 

• Nonsupplanting of State or Local Funds 

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements 

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/ 

• Suspension or Termination of Funding 

• Nonprofit Organizations 

• For-Profit Organizations 

• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

16
 
• Rights in Intellectual Property 

• Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) 

If your proposal is funded, you will be required to submit several reports and other 

materials, including: 

Final substantive report: The final report should be a comprehensive overview of the 

project and should include, among other things, a detailed description of the project 

design, data, and methods; a full presentation of scientific findings; and a thorough 

discussion of the implications of the project findings for criminal justice practice and 

policy in the United States. It must contain an abstract of no more than 600 words and 

an executive summary of 2,500 to 4,000 words. 

A draft of the final report, abstract, and executive summary must be submitted 90 days 

before the end date of the grant. The draft final report will be peer reviewed upon 

submission. The reviews will be forwarded to the principal investigator with suggestions 

for revisions. The author must then submit the revised final report, abstract, and 

executive summary by the end date of the grant. The abstract, executive summary, and 

final report must be submitted in both paper and electronic formats. 

For program evaluation studies, the final report should include a section on measuring 

program performance. This section should outline the measures used to evaluate 

program effectiveness, modifications made to those measures as a result of the 

evaluation, and recommendations regarding these and other potential performance 

measures for similar programs. (This information will be particularly valuable to NIJ and 

other Federal program agencies in implementing performance measures for federally 

funded criminal justice programs.) 

Interim reports: Grantees must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual progress 

reports, a final progress report, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in accordance 

with Office of Management and Budget Circular A–133. Future awards and fund 

drawdowns may be withheld if reports are delinquent. 

Data sets: NIJ requires submission of all data sets (original, intermediate, and final) 

produced or collected for the project, and any artifact associated with the project data. 

Included with the final sets of data should be the plan outlined in the Data Archiving 

Strategy section of the proposal. 

17