NOTICE

The 2013 Research and Evaluation on Policing solicitation has been modified. The 

solicitation now establishes four (4) separate and distinct topic areas for competition: 

Officer Safety and Wellness. 

Police Technology.

Police Integrity. 

Consolidation of Law Enforcement Agencies. 

Applicants should clearly identify the topic area to which the application is responding. 

Applicants may submit to any or all topic areas; however, applications must be 

responsive to the specific requirement of the topic area selected. Applicants interested in 

submitting proposals in other policing areas can submit to NIJ’s FY 2013 Research and 

Evaluation on Justice Systems: Investigator-Initiated solicitation.
U.S. Department of Justice OMB No. 1121-0329

Office of Justice Programs 

National Institute of Justice

 

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

Justice (NIJ) is pleased to announce that it is seeking applications to conduct research on 

policing for the improvement of law enforcement practices and operations. 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, local, and tribal levels.

Research and Evaluation on Policing

Eligibility

Eligible applicants are States (including territories), units of local government (including 

federally-recognized Indian tribal governments as determined by the Secretary of the Interior), 

nonprofit and for-profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), 

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

qualified individuals. For-profit organizations must agree to forgo any profit or management fee. 

Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and foreign institutions of higher education are not 

eligible to apply.

NIJ may elect to make awards for applications submitted under this solicitation in future fiscal 

years, dependent on the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations.

Deadline

Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. (See “How to Apply,”

page 22). All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on April 26, 2013. (See 

“Deadlines: Registration and Application,” page 3.)

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 e-mail to support@grants.gov.

Note: The Grants.gov Support Hotline hours of operation are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 

except federal holidays.

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact Brett Chapman, Social 

Science Analyst, at 202-514-2187, or by e-mail at Brett.Chapman@usdoj.gov or Eric D. Martin, 

Social Science Analyst, at 202-514-9588, or by e-mail at Eric.D.Martin@usdoj.gov.

Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: NIJ-2013-3449

Release date: January 30, 2013

SL001035
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

2

Contents

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

Deadlines: Registration and Application......................................................................................3

Eligibility......................................................................................................................................3

Program-Specific Information......................................................................................................3

Performance Measures...............................................................................................................8

Notice of Post-Award FFATA Reporting Requirement.................................................................9

What an Application Should Include............................................................................................9

Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) .....................10

Abstract.........................................................................................................................10

Program Narrative .........................................................................................................12

Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative.............................................................15

Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)..................................................................15

Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)...................................................................16

Additional Attachments..................................................................................................16

Other Standard Forms...................................................................................................18

Selection Criteria.......................................................................................................................18

Review Process ........................................................................................................................20

Additional Requirements ...........................................................................................................20

How to Apply.............................................................................................................................22

Provide Feedback to OJP on This Solicitation...........................................................................25

Application Checklist.................................................................................................................26
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

3

Research and Evaluation on Policing

(CFDA No. 16.560)

Overview

NIJ seeks proposals to conduct research on policing to promote officer safety and wellness, 

understand the impact of police technology on crime control and disorder, promote police 

integrity, and explore the costs and benefits of the consolidation of police agencies at the State, 

local, and tribal levels. Effective practices in these areas are of critical importance to improving 

law enforcement operations and ensuring trust and confidence in the police in communities 

throughout the country. 

Authorizing Legislation: Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 

(sections 201 and 202).

Deadlines: Registration and Application

Applicants must register with Grants.gov in order to submit an application. OJP encourages

applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline. In addition, 

OJP urges applicants to submit applications 72 hours prior to the application due date. The 

deadline to apply for funding under this announcement is 11:59 p.m. eastern time on April 26, 

2013. See “How to Apply” on page 22 for details.

Eligibility

Refer to the title page for eligibility under this program.

Program-Specific Information

The Research and Evaluation on Policing solicitation focuses on four policing topics relevant to 

State, local, or tribal criminal justice policy and practice, including proposals addressing the 

following topics: 

• Officer Safety and Wellness 

• Police Technology 

• Police Integrity

• Consolidation of Law Enforcement Agencies

Research and Evaluation on Officer Safety and Wellness

Policing in the United States has faced numerous challenges in recent years. In addition to the 

dangerous nature of police work, budget cutbacks have resulted in a decrease in the police 

workforce through layoffs, hiring freezes, early retirements, and the elimination of specialized 

crime-fighting units. The dangerous nature of police work is illustrated by traffic fatalities that 

represented the largest number of line-of-duty deaths prior to 2011 and assaults on officers on 

duty while making arrests or transporting prisoners. Additionally, police officers are presented 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

4

with other challenges that may impact their overall health and wellness. The nature of police 

work has been linked to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and factors such as poor sleep 

patterns, stress, inadequate diet, and a lack of proper exercise, all of which may increase the 

risk of hypertension, heart disease, depression, diabetes, or suicide.

The successful applicant will submit a final report that provides an evaluation of evidence-based 

approaches designed and implemented to promote officer safety or wellness.

Research and Evaluation on Police Technology

NIJ seeks evaluations of technologies implemented by police agencies to control crime and 

disorder, promote public safety, or minimize fear in the community using various police 

technologies. Over the last two decades, advances in technology have resulted in significant 

changes in policing in the United States. Advancements in technologies such as automated 

vehicle locators (AVL), crime mapping applications, license plate recognition (LPR), video 

surveillance cameras, less-lethal weapons, police use of force simulators, body cameras, and 

mobile phones with enhanced investigative functions have changed American policing. Despite 

the promise that technologies offer, implementation is likely to impact the organization. For 

example, the adoption of new technologies may impact recruiting, training, or the need for 

changes in agency policies and procedures governing the use of those technologies. New tools 

or technologies may also have a positive impact on a police department, but produce 

unanticipated outcomes in the community. For example, the implementation of technology may 

increase officer effectiveness but damage relationships between the police and community 

residents. 

The successful applicant will evaluate the impact of police technologies on crime control as well 

as provide a cost/benefit analysis to examine the impact of the adoption of new technologies on 

existing police resources.

Research and Evaluation on Police Integrity

One of the biggest challenges to public trust and confidence in the police involves police 

integrity. Because of the highly discretionary nature of policing, managers have been confronted 

with incidents of abuse of authority (e.g., corruption, excessive use of force, other misconduct) 

by police officers. Incidents of abuse of authority have the potential to erode public trust and 

confidence in the police and could impact citizen compliance with the law. To combat this 

problem many departments have responded by implementing internal and external mechanisms 

to promote police integrity and departmental accountability. Such mechanisms may include 

early intervention systems; discipline matrices; education-based discipline; mediation; reporting 

requirements for use of force; administrative reviews of shootings and use of deadly or less 

lethal force; investigation of complaints of misconduct; management supervision; recruitment, 

retention, and training; and civilian oversight review boards. NIJ is interested in supporting 

evaluations that examine the impact of internal and/or external mechanisms to promote police 

integrity.

The successful applicant will submit a final report that provides an evaluation of evidence-based 

approaches designed and implemented to change officer misbehavior and promote police 

integrity.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

5

Research and Evaluation on the Consolidation of Law Enforcement Agencies

Many municipalities in this country have to make tough decisions concerning the level of public 

service delivery in the midst of the current fiscal crisis. Law enforcement consolidation is seen 

as a viable option to maintain basic police services in localities that can no longer afford to 

maintain their current delivery of police services. The field does not know, however, what 

changes in service delivery, citizen satisfaction, legitimacy, and long-term costs police force 

consolidation will entail. Although the consolidation of police agencies across several 

jurisdictions may improve the delivery of police services and improve citizen satisfaction with the 

police, other outcomes in this process may be less clear. For example, what are the short- and 

long-term costs or savings that can be expected from consolidation? What is the impact of 

consolidation on the overall level of crime? What technologies and administrative systems 

improved the consolidation of police agencies? 

The successful applicant will submit a final report that provides an evaluation, and a cost benefit 

analysis of approaches designed and implemented to consolidate police services across two or 

more municipal jurisdictions.

Evidence-based Programs or Practices

OJP places a strong emphasis on the use of data and evidence in policymaking and program 

development in criminal justice. OJP is committed to:

• improving the quantity and quality of evidence OJP generates; 

• integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the 

field; and

• improving the translation of evidence into practice.

OJP considers programs and practices to be evidence-based when their effectiveness has been 

demonstrated by causal evidence, generally obtained through one or more outcome 

evaluations. Causal evidence documents a relationship between an activity or intervention 

(including technology) and its intended outcome, including measuring the direction and size of a 

change, and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention.

Causal evidence depends on the use of scientific methods to rule out, to the extent possible, 

alternative explanations for the documented change. The strength of causal evidence, based on 

the factors described above, will influence the degree to which OJP considers a program or 

practice to be evidence based. OJP’s CrimeSolutions.gov is one resource that applicants may 

use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and 

crime victim services.

Amount and Length of Awards: NIJ anticipates that up to a total of $3 million may become 

available for multiple awards made through this solicitation. All awards are subject to the 

availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements 

that may be imposed by law. NIJ funding for an individual research project rarely exceeds 

$500,000, though total funding for projects requiring multiple years to complete has exceeded 

$1 million in some cases.

Applicants should be aware that the total period for an award ordinarily will not exceed 3 years.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

6

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 such 

as Propensity Score Matching or 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 of services that 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 cost/benefit analysis will be given priority. NIJ views 

cost/benefit analysis 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 www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm.

What will not be funded: 

1. Provision of training or direct service.

2. Proposals primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (The 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.

4. Proposals that do not contain a research component or do not respond to the specific goals 

of this solicitation.

5. Research that lacks clear implications for criminal justice policy and/or practice in the United 

States. 

Budget Information

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

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

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

employee of the award 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. The 2012 salary table 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

7

for SES employees is available at www.opm.gov/oca/12tables/indexSES.asp. 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. (Any such additional compensation will 

not be considered matching funds where match requirements apply.)

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

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

requesting a waiver should include a detailed justification in the budget narrative of the 

application. Unless the applicant submits a waiver request and justification with the application, 

the applicant should anticipate that OJP will request the applicant to adjust and resubmit the 

budget.

The justification should include the particular qualifications and expertise of the individual, the 

uniqueness of the service the individual will provide, the individual’s specific knowledge of the 

program or project being undertaken with award funds, and a statement explaining that the 

individual’s salary is commensurate with the regular and customary rate for an individual with 

his/her qualifications and expertise, and for the work to be done.

Minimization of Conference Costs

OJP encourages applicants to review the OJP guidance on conference approval, planning, and 

reporting that is available on the OJP Web site at www.ojp.gov/funding/confcost.htm. This 

guidance sets out the current OJP policy, which requires all funding recipients that propose to 

hold or sponsor conferences (including, meetings, trainings, and other similar events) to 

minimize costs, requires OJP review and prior written approval of most conference costs for 

cooperative agreement recipients (and certain costs for grant recipients), and generally prohibits 

the use of OJP funding to provide food and beverages at conferences. The guidance also sets 

upper limits on many conference costs, including facility space, audio/visual services, logistical 

planning services, programmatic planning services, and food and beverages (in the rare cases 

where food and beverage costs are permitted at all).

Prior review and approval of conference costs can take time (see the guidance for specific 

deadlines), and applicants should take this into account when submitting proposals. Applicants 

also should understand that conference cost limits may change and that they should check the 

guidance for updates before incurring such costs. 

Note on food and beverages: OJP may make exceptions to the general prohibition on using 

OJP funding for food and beverages, but will do so only in rare cases where food and 

beverages are not otherwise available (e.g., in extremely remote areas); the size of the event 

and capacity of nearby food and beverage vendors would make it impractical to not provide food 

and beverages; or a special presentation at a conference requires a plenary address where 

conference participants have no other time to obtain food and beverages. Any such exception 

requires OJP’s prior written approval. The restriction on food and beverages does not apply to 

water provided at no cost, but does apply to any and all other refreshments, regardless of the 

size or nature of the meeting. Additionally, this restriction does not affect direct payment of per 

diem amounts to individuals in a travel status under your organization’s travel policy.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

8

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 of the OJP "Other 

Requirements for OJP Applications" Web page at 

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

Match Requirement 

See “Cofunding” paragraph under “What an Application Should Include” (below).

Performance Measures

To assist the Department 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, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation must provide data 

that measure the results of their work done under this solicitation. OJP will require any award 

recipient, post award, to provide the data requested in the “Data Grantee Provides” column so 

that OJP can calculate values for the “Performance Measures” column. Performance measures 

for this solicitation are as follows:

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides

Develop and analyze 

information and data 

having clear implications 

for criminal justice policy 

and practice in the 

United States, 

addressing one of the 

following topics: 

•Officer Safety and 

Wellness 

•Police Technology 

•Police Integrity

•Consolidation of Law 

Enforcement Agencies

1. 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.

2. Quality of the research as 

assessed by peer reviewers. 

3. Quality of management as 

measured by whether significant 

interim project milestones were 

achieved, final deadlines were met, 

and costs remained within 

approved limits.

4. If applicable, number of NIJ final 

grant reports, NIJ research 

documents, and grantee research 

documents published.

1. 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 in the United 

States.

2. Quarterly financial reports, semiannual progress reports, and a final 

progress report.

3. If applicable, each data set that 

was collected, acquired, or modified 

in conjunction with the project.

4. If applicable, citation to 

report(s)/documents.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

9

OJP does not require applicants to submit performance measures data with their applications. 

Instead, applicants should discuss in their application their proposed methods for collecting data 

for performance measures. Refer to the section “What an Application Should Include” on page 9 

for additional information.

Note on Project Evaluations

Applicants that propose to use funds awarded through this solicitation to conduct project 

evaluations should be aware that certain project evaluations (such as systematic investigations 

designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge) may constitute “research” for 

purposes of applicable DOJ human subjects protection regulations. However, project 

evaluations that are intended only to generate internal improvements to a program or service, or 

are conducted only to meet OJP’s performance measure data reporting requirements likely do 

not constitute “research.” Applicants should provide sufficient information for OJP to determine 

whether the particular project they propose would either intentionally or unintentionally collect 

and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ regulatory definition of research.

Research, for the purposes of human subjects protections for OJP-funded programs, is defined 

as, “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, 

designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge” 28 C.F.R. § 46.102(d). For 

additional information on determining whether a proposed activity would constitute research, 

see the decision tree to assist applicants on the “Research and the Protection of Human 

Subjects” section of the OJP “Other Requirements for OJP Applications” Web page 

(www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm). Applicants whose proposals may involve 

a research or statistical component also should review the “Confidentiality” section on that Web 

page.

Notice of Post-Award FFATA Reporting Requirement

Applicants should anticipate that OJP will require all recipients (other than individuals) of awards 

of $25,000 or more under this solicitation, consistent with the Federal Funding Accountability 

and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), to report award information on any first-tier subawards 

totaling $25,000 or more, and, in certain cases, to report information on the names and total 

compensation of the five most highly compensated executives of the recipient and first-tier 

subrecipients. Each applicant entity must ensure that it has the necessary processes and 

systems in place to comply with the reporting requirements should it receive funding. Reports 

regarding subawards will be made through the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS), 

found at www.fsrs.gov.

Please note also that applicants should anticipate that no subaward of an award made under 

this solicitation may be made to a subrecipient (other than an individual) unless the potential 

subrecipient acquires and provides a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number.

What an Application Should Include

Applicants should anticipate that if they fail to submit an application that contains all of the 

specified elements, it may negatively affect the review of their application; and, should a 

decision be made to make an award, it may result in the inclusion of special conditions that 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

10

preclude the recipient from accessing or using award funds pending satisfaction of the 

conditions.

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications that are determined to be 

nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation, or that do not include the application elements 

that NIJ has designated to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further 

consideration. Under this solicitation, NIJ has designated the following application elements as 

critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative, and

resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel. Applicants may combine the Budget Narrative and 

the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant submits only one 

document, it must contain both narrative and detail information.

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 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).

2. Abstract

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.

 Single-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman) with 

1-inch margins.

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

the program narrative. 

All project abstracts should follow the detailed template available at 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/Project_Abstract_Template.pdf and the supplemental

instructions below.

The abstract is a critical part of your application, serving as an important introduction to 

your proposed study. NIJ uses the abstract for a number of purposes, including 

assignment to the appropriate independent review panel. If your proposal is funded, the 

abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe your proposed 

work. The abstract must be 250-400 words and describe the proposed work succinctly 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

11

and accurately. The abstract does not count against the 30-page limit for program 

narrative, and should follow this format: 

1. Goals and Objectives: State the purpose of the project, the problem to be 

investigated, and the anticipated relevance to criminal justice policy, practice, and 

theory.

2. Subjects: If applicable, include the number of subjects in your study and a 

description of their characteristics, such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, and other 

pertinent attributes.

3. Research Design and Methods: Summarize how the work will be organized and 

conducted by including one or more of the following:

• Describe the methods proposed including a clear timeline, the type of data, 

collection strategies, instruments, study sites, and other methods or procedures. 

For an evaluation, clearly describe the type of evaluation (randomized control trial, 

quasi-experimental design, or process evaluation).

• State the hypothesis and the innovative potential of the research; list and briefly 

describe the specific aims; and briefly describe the research rationale and the 

experiments that will be conducted to accomplish each aim.

• For technology development efforts, briefly describe how the technology is to be 

introduced into practice and any key technology challenges. If applicable, provide 

an overview of the anticipated commercialization strategy. For technology research 

and development projects, briefly describe key technology challenges and how 

they will be overcome.

4. Analysis: Summarize the techniques proposed for data analysis. Summarize 

steps to be taken to strengthen the reliability and validity of the analysis. 

5. Products, Reports, and Data Archiving: Describe the expected products such as 

data sets, interim and final reports, and tools or technologies. If applicable, 

describe data to be archived under NIJ’s Data Resource Program. 

Permission to Share Project Abstract with the Public: It is unlikely that NIJ will be able to 

fund all promising applications submitted under this solicitation, but it may have the 

opportunity to share information with the public regarding promising but unfunded 

applications, for example, through a listing on a webpage available to the public. The 

intent of this public posting would be to allow other possible funders to become aware of 

such proposals. 

In the project abstract template, applicants are asked to indicate whether they give OJP 

permission to share their project abstract (including contact information) with the public. 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

12

Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not affect OJP’s funding decisions, and, 

if the application is not funded, granting permission will not guarantee that abstract 

information will be shared, nor will it guarantee funding from any other source.

Note: OJP may choose not to list a project that otherwise would have been included in a 

listing of promising but unfunded applications, should the abstract fail to meet the format 

and content requirements noted above and outlined in the project abstract template.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 30 pages doublespaced pages in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. Abstract, table of contents, charts, 

figures, appendices, and government forms do not count toward the 30-page limit for the 

narrative section.

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.

Program Narrative Guidelines: 

a. Title Page (not counted against the 30-page program narrative limit).

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

opportunity number, and the applicant’s name and complete contact information 

(i.e., name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address).

b. Resubmit Response (if applicable) (not counted against the 30-page program 

narrative limit). If an applicant is resubmitting a proposal that was 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 NIJ-assigned application number of the previous proposal, 

and (2) a brief summary of revisions to the proposal. This document should be 

inserted after the abstract.

c. Table of Contents and Figures (not counted against the 30-page program 

narrative limit). 

d. Main body. The main body of the program narrative should describe the project 

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

narrative: 

• Statement of the Problem.

• Project/Program Design and Implementation.

• Capabilities/Competencies.

• Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation.

• Dissemination Strategy.

Within these sections, the narrative should address:

• Purpose, goals, and objectives.

• Review of relevant literature.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

13

• Detailed description of research design and methods to include: 

research questions, hypotheses, description of sample, analysis plan, 

etc.

• Implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the United 

States.

• Management plan and organization.

e. Appendices (not counted against the 30-page program narrative limit) include:

• Bibliography/references.

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

 pertaining to the proposed study.

• Curriculum vitae, resumes or biographical sketches of key personnel. 

• Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones. 

• Research independence and integrity (see “Selection Criteria,” below).

• Human Subjects Protection Paperwork including Institutional Review 

Board (IRB) documentation and forms (see 

www.ojp.gov/nij/funding/humansubjects/human-subjects.htm).

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to 

www.ojp.gov/nij/funding/humansubjects/privacy-certificate-guidance.htm).

• List of previous and current NIJ awards to applicant organization and 

investigator(s).

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and 

correctional agencies (if applicable).

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

proposal has been submitted (if applicable).

• Other materials specified by the solicitation.

• Data archiving plan (see descriptive paragraph below).

Data Archiving Plan: Applications should include a brief plan to comply with data archiving 

requirements. The plan should be one or two pages in length and include a description of the 

proposed data management and archiving process including confidentiality protections and level 

of effort associated with meeting archiving requirements. Associated tasks should be reflected 

in the proposed project budget and budget narrative sections of the application.

In most instances, NIJ requires that data resulting from funded research be submitted as grant 

products or deliverables for archiving with the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data 

(NACJD) (www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/archive.jsp). The purpose of the Data 

Archiving Plan is to demonstrate recognition by applicants that data sets resulting from the 

proposed research are required to be submitted as grant products for archiving according to 

special grant conditions. Along with other grant products, special conditions require that all 

research data be submitted 90 days before the end of the project period. Some amount of grant 

award funds is typically withheld for submission of research data along with the final report and 

other products/deliverables.

The plan should be submitted as an appendix labeled, “Data Archiving Plan.” The number of 

pages used for the plan will not count against the narrative page limit. The plan should provide 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

14

brief details about the proposed archiving process including submission of these files: qualitative 

and quantitative data, final technical reports, instrumentation and data collection forms, and the 

privacy certificate and informed consent protocols including protections for confidentiality (where 

applicable). The focus of the Data Archiving Plan is to describe how the grant data products will 

be prepared and documented so as to allow reproduction of the project’s findings as well as 

future research that can extend the scientific value of the original project (See: 

www.icpsr.umich.edu/files/ICPSR/access/dataprep.pdf).

Specifically, the Data Archiving Plan includes:

• Information regarding data formats (quantitative/qualitative/spatial) and software with 

which data will be collected, entered into a database, stored, analyzed and transferred. 

Standard commercial software or software typically acceptable to NACJD should be 

identified for use in the proposed data collection 

(www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/archiving/deposit-nij-data.jsp).

• A description of procedures by which the applicant plans to collect data along with 

anticipated units of analysis (e.g., individuals, locations), level of analysis and other 

identifiers for each data file that will be submitted upon completion of the funded 

research. 

• If the proposed research includes collection of information identifiable to private persons

o A description of all assurances of confidentiality made to those persons

o A copy of the consent form that was utilized

o A copy of the Privacy Certificate (as submitted to and approved by the funding 

agency)

o IRB approval documentation

o Any information transfer agreement that was utilized to transfer the data with 

identifiers.

• Any anticipated variable creation, data transformations or scale construction that may be 

critical to the interpretation or analysis of the data by others. 

• A plan for submission of computer programming code or software syntax providing detail 

on how the data will be processed including any significant treatments of the data such 

as de-identification, imputation, filtering or weighting. 

• A description of the technical documentation (e.g., data dictionary or codebook) that 

explains how variables will be designated in the data file(s), such as the use of variable 

naming conventions and variable groups, missing data/value designations, variable and

category/value labels, operational definitions and citations as needed for these variables. 

• Contact information for the Principal Investigator in the event other researchers should 

need more information about the study or the data.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

15

4. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at 

www.ojp.gov/funding/forms/budget_detail.pdf. Applicants that submit their budget in 

a different format should include the budget categories listed in the sample budget 

worksheet.

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

see the OJP Financial Guide at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/index.htm.

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).

Applicants should demonstrate in their budget narratives how they will maximize cost 

effectiveness of grant 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 narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond 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 they are relevant 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 be broken down by year.

Cofunding: A grant 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.

If a successful applicant’s proposed match exceeds the required match amount, and 

OJP approves the budget, the total match amount incorporated into the approved 

budget becomes mandatory and subject to audit.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs are allowed only if the applicant has a federally approved indirect cost rate. 

(This requirement does not apply to units of local government.) Attach a copy of the 

federally approved indirect cost rate agreement to the application. Applicants that do not 

have an approved rate may request one through their cognizant federal agency, which 

will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant organization, or, if the 

applicant’s accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

16

categories. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, obtain information needed to submit 

an indirect cost rate proposal at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/pdfs/indirect_costs.pdf.

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

Tribes, tribal organizations, or third parties proposing to provide direct services or 

assistance to residents on tribal lands should include in their applications a resolution, a 

letter, affidavit, or other documentation, as appropriate, that certifies that the applicant 

has the legal authority from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed project on tribal 

lands. In those instances when an organization or consortium of tribes applies for a grant 

on behalf of a tribe or multiple specific tribes, then the application should include 

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

services/assistance under the grant. 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.

7. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant disclosure of pending applications.

Applicants are to disclose whether they have pending applications for federally funded 

assistance that include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed 

under this solicitation and will cover the identical cost items outlined in the budget 

narrative and worksheet in the application under this solicitation. The disclosure should 

include both direct applications for federal funding (e.g., applications to federal agencies) 

and indirect applications for such funding (e.g., applications to State agencies that will be 

subawarding 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.

Applicants that have pending applications as described above are 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 funding agency.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

17

SAMPLE

Applicants should include the table as a separate attachment, with the file name 

“Disclosure of Pending Applications,” to their application. Applicants that do not have 

pending applications as described above are to include a statement to this effect in the 

separate attachment page. (e.g., “[Applicant Name] does not have pending applications

submitted within the last 12 months for federally funded assistance that include requests 

for funding to support the same project being proposed under this solicitation and will 

cover the identical cost items outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the 

application under this solicitation.”)

b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

If a proposal involves research and/or evaluation, regardless of the proposal’s rating 

under the selection criteria, in order to receive funds, the applicant’s proposal must 

demonstrate research/evaluation independence, including appropriate safeguards to 

ensure research/evaluation objectivity and integrity.

For purposes of this solicitation, research and evaluation independence and integrity 

pertains to ensuring that the design, conduct, or reporting of research/evaluation funded 

by NIJ grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts will not be biased by any personal 

or financial conflict of interest on the part of the investigators responsible for the 

research/evaluation or on the part of the applicant organization. Conflicts can be either 

actual or apparent. Examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict 

situations may include where an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a 

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

evaluate the work of a former colleague (apparent conflict). With regard to potential 

organizational conflicts of interest, as one example, generally an organization could not 

be given a grant to evaluate a project if that organization had itself provided substantial 

prior technical assistance to that project, as the organization in such an instance would 

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/evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside 

personal or financial interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability is a 

problem. 

Federal or 

State 

Funding 

Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

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

Funding Agency

DOJ/COPS COPS Hiring 

Program

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

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
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

18

In the attachment dealing with research and evaluation independence and integrity, the 

applicant should explain the process and procedures that the applicant has put in place 

to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) potential personal or financial 

conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, and/or subrecipients. It should 

also identify any potential organizational conflicts of interest on the part of the applicant 

with regard to the proposed research/evaluation. If the applicant reasonably believes 

that no potential personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist, then the applicant 

should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it reached that conclusion.

Where potential personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist, in the attachment, 

the applicant should identify the safeguards the applicant has or will put in place to 

eliminate, mitigate, explain, or otherwise address those conflicts of interest.

Considerations in assessing research and evaluation independence and integrity will 

include, but may not be limited to, the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify

factors that could affect the objectivity/integrity of the proposed staff and/or the 

organization 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.

8. Other Standard Forms

Additional forms that OJP may require in connection with an award are available on

OJP’s funding page at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms.htm. For successful applicants, 

receipt of funds may be contingent upon submission of all necessary forms. Note in 

particular the following forms:

a. Standard Assurances*

Applicants must read, certify, and submit this form in GMS prior to the receipt 

of any award funds.

b. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements*

Applicants must read, certify, and submit in GMS prior to the receipt of any 

award funds.

c. Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire

Any applicant (other than an individual) that is a non-governmental entity and 

that has not received any award from OJP within the past 3 years, must 

download, complete, and submit this form.

*These OJP Standard Assurances and Certifications are forms which applicants accept in GMS. 

They are not additional forms to be uploaded at the time of application submission.

Selection Criteria

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

1. Clarity of the problem statement.

2. Identification of gaps in existing research. 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

19

3. Connection between proposed research and problem.

4. Awareness of the state of current research.

Project/Program Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit)—40%

1. Soundness of methods and analytic and technical approach.

2. Feasibility of proposed project and awareness of pitfalls.

3. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate).

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

applicants)—15%

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—5%

NOTE: The budget should be complete, cost effective, and allowable (e.g., reasonable, 

allocable, and necessary for project activities.) Budget narratives should generally demonstrate 

how applicants will maximize cost effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives 

should demonstrate cost effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the 

project.

1

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit (cost effectiveness).

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)—25% 

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 

in the United States and improving public safety, security, and quality of life.

4. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed products, when applicable (e.g., 

purchase price and maintenance costs for a new technology or cost of training to use the 

technology).

Relevance of the project for policy and practice in the United States

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. The application may include letters showing 

support from practitioners, but they carry less weight than clear evidence of the applicant’s 

understanding of how policymakers and practitioners can best use and benefit from the 

 1 Generally speaking, a reasonable cost is a cost that, in its nature or amount, does not exceed that which would be 

incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the 

costs.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

20

proposed work. While a partnership may affect State or local activities, it should also have 

broader implications for other communities nationwide.

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 that NIJ should consider developing for 

practitioners and policymakers.

3. If applicable, a clear strategy leading to the adoption into practice of any equipment or 

software. 

Review Process

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for awarding grants. 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. NIJ may use either internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or 

a combination, to review the applications. 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. A peer review panel will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic 

minimum requirements. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are 

advisory only. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations for award recommendations and 

decisions may include, but are not limited to, underserved populations, geographic diversity, 

strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding.

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), in consultation with NIJ, reviews applications 

for potential discretionary awards to evaluate the fiscal integrity and financial capability of 

applicants, examines proposed costs to determine if the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget 

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

necessary, and allowable under applicable federal cost principles and agency regulations. 

All final award decisions will be made by the Director of the National Institute of Justice, who 

may consider factors including, but not limited to, underserved populations, geographic 

diversity, strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding when making awards.

Additional Requirements

Applicants selected for awards must agree to comply with additional legal requirements upon 

acceptance of an award. OJP encourages applicants to review the information pertaining to 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

21

these additional requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional information for each 

requirement can be found at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

• Civil Rights Compliance

• Civil Rights Compliance Specific to State Administering Agencies

• Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations

• Confidentiality

• Research and the Protection of Human Subjects

• Anti-Lobbying Act

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

• DOJ Information Technology Standards (if applicable) 

• Single Point of Contact Review

• Non-Supplanting of State or Local Funds

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide

• Suspension or Termination of Funding

• Nonprofit Organizations

• For-profit Organizations

• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)

• Rights in Intellectual Property 

• Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) 

• Awards in Excess of $5,000,000 – Federal Taxes Certification Requirement

• Policy and Guidance for Conference Approval, Planning, and Reporting

• OJP Training Guiding Principles for Grantees and Subgrantees
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

22

If a proposal is funded, the award recipient 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 a detailed description of the project design, data, and methods; a full 

presentation of scientific findings, placed in the context of existing literature; a thorough 

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

United States; etc. 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 electronic 

format.

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. Semi-annual progress reports will be submitted in the 

Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) format (www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rppr/).

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

or collected for the funded 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 Plan section of the 

proposal.

How to Apply 

Applicants must submit applications through Grants.gov. Applicants must first register with 

Grants.gov in order to submit an application through Grants.gov, a “one-stop storefront” 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, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except 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 and a user password. OJP 

encourages applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline. 

In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications 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.

Note: NIJ 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 email updates will be notified.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

23

1. Acquire a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. In general, the Office 

of Management and Budget requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for 

federal funds include a DUNS number in their applications for a new award or a 

supplement to an existing award. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence 

recognized as the universal standard for identifying and differentiating 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, 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 replaces 

the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database as the repository for standard 

information about federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. 

OJP requires all applicants (other than individuals) for federal financial assistance to 

maintain current registrations in the SAM database. Applicants must be registered in 

SAM to successfully register in Grants.gov. (Previously, organizations that had 

submitted applications via Grants.gov were registered with CCR, as it was a requirement 

for Grants.gov registration. SAM registration replaces CCR as a pre-requisite for 

Grants.gov registration.) Applicants must update or renew their SAM registration 

annually to maintain an active status. 

Applicants that were previously registered in the CCR database must, at a minimum:

• Create a SAM account;

• Log in to SAM and migrate permissions to the SAM account (all the entity 

registrations and records should already have been migrated).

Applicants that were not previously registered in the CCR database must register in 

SAM prior to registering in Grants.gov. 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. The applicant organization’s DUNS number must be used to 

complete this step. For more information about the registration process, go to 

www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp.

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. 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-2013-3449.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

24

6. Complete the Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. All applicants must complete this 

information. Applicants that expend any funds for lobbying activities must provide the 

detailed information requested on the form, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). 

Applicants that do not expend any funds for lobbying activities should enter “N/A” in the 

required highlighted fields. 

7. Submit an 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 an e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The message 

will state whether the application has been received and validated, or rejected due to 

errors, with an explanation. Important: OJP urges applicants to submit applications at 

least 72 hours prior of 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.

Note: Grants.gov only permits the use of specific characters in names of attachment 

files. Valid file names may only include the following characters: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore 

(_), hyphen (-), space, and period. Grants.gov will forward the application to OJP’s Grants 

Management System (GMS). 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.”

Note: Duplicate Applications

If an applicant submits multiple versions of an application, NIJ will review the most recent 

version submitted. 

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

Applicants that experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond their control that 

prevent them from submitting their application by the deadline must e-mail the NIJ contact 

identified in the Contact Information section on the title page within 24 hours after the 

application deadline and request approval to submit their application. The e-mail must 

describe the technical difficulties, and 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: NIJ does not automatically approve requests. After the 

program office reviews the submission, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to 

validate the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to 

submit a late application has been approved or denied. If the technical issues reported cannot 

be validated, OJP will reject the application as untimely. 

The following conditions are not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) failure to register 

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

posted on its Web site, (3) failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation, and (4) 

technical issues with the applicant’s computer or information technology environment, including 

firewalls.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

25

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

of the OJP funding Web page at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/solicitations.htm.

Provide Feedback to OJP on This Solicitation

To assist OJP in improving its application and award processes, we encourage applicants to 

provide feedback on this solicitation, the application submission process, and/or the application 

review/peer review process. Feedback may be provided to 

OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov.

IMPORTANT: This email is for feedback and suggestions only. Replies are not sent from this 

mailbox. If you have specific questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation, 

you must directly contact the appropriate number or email listed on the front of this solicitation 

document. These contacts are provided to help ensure that you can directly reach an individual 

who can address your specific questions in a timely manner. 

If you are interested in being a reviewer for other OJP grant applications, please email your 

resume to ojppeerreview@lmbps.com. The OJP Solicitation Feedback email account will not

forward your resume. Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization can be a peer 

reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization has submitted an application.
NIJ-2013-3449

OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 02/28/2013

26

Application Checklist

Research and Evaluation on Policing

This application checklist has been created to assist in developing an application.

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 10)

_____ Abstract (see page 10)

_____ Program Narrative (see page 12)

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 15)

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 15)

_____ Resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel (see page 13)

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 24)

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 15)

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 16)

_____ Additional Attachments 

_____ Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 16)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 17)

_____ Other Standard Forms as applicable (see page 18), including:

_____ Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable)