Notice 

The 2012 Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems solicitation has been modified. 

The solicitation now establishes three (3) separate and distinct topic areas for 

competition: 

• Research on District Attorneys’ Pretrial Diversion Programs. 

• Pilot Study on the Impact of Incarceration on Families. 

• Research on the Impact of Video Visitation. 

Applicants must 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. Applications that fall 

outside of the three topic areas will not be considered. 

 
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 for funding 

for research to examine issues related to the criminal justice system, specifically the 

function and process of the system from detection and arrest through offender reentry. 

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. 

Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems 

Eligibility 

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

agreements with, 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 

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

in future years. 

Deadline 

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

Apply,” page 11.) All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on April 30, 2012. 

(See “Deadlines: Registration and Application,” page 4.) 

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 Linda Truitt, 

Senior Social Science Analyst, for research on district attorneys’ pretrial diversion 

programs, at 202–353–9081 or Linda.Truitt@usdoj.gov; Marie Garcia, Social Science 

Analyst, for the pilot study on impact of incarceration on families, at 202–514–7128 or 

Marie.Garcia@usdoj.gov; or Eric Martin, Social Science Analyst, for research on the 

impact of video visitation, at 202–514–9588 or Eric.D.Martin@usdoj.gov. 

Grants.gov number assigned to announcement: NIJ-2012-3092

 Release Date: January 24, 2012 

SL000981
Contents

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

Deadlines: Registration and Application ........................................................................... 4 

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

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

Performance Measures .................................................................................................. 10 

Notice of Post-Award FFATA Reporting Requirement ................................................... 11 

How to Apply .................................................................................................................. 11 

What an Application Should Include .............................................................................. 14 

Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) ........ 14 

Program Narrative .............................................................................................. 14 

Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative ................................................ 17 

Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) ..................................................... 18 

Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) ....................................................... 18 

Other Standard Forms ....................................................................................... 19 

Selection Criteria ............................................................................................................ 20 

Review Process ............................................................................................................. 21 

Additional Requirements ................................................................................................ 21 

Provide Feedback to OJP on This Solicitation ............................................................... 23 

Application Checklist ...................................................................................................... 24 

3 
Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems 

(CFDA No. 16.560) 

Overview 

This solicitation seeks proposals to examine topics relevant to State and/or local criminal 

and juvenile justice systems policy and practice. Specific focus areas under this 

solicitation for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 include: research on District Attorneys’ pretrial 

diversion programs (anticipates one award of up to $1 million); a pilot study on the 

impact of incarceration on families (anticipates one award of up to $500,000); and 

research on the impact of video visitation on offender outcomes (anticipates one award 

of up to $350,000). Application titles should clearly indicate the focus area selected. 

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 prior to submitting an application. OJP 

encourages applicants to register several weeks before the application submission 

deadline. The deadline to apply for funding under this announcement is 11:59 p.m. 

eastern time on April 30, 2012. See the “How to Apply” section on page 11 for details. 

Eligibility 

Refer to the title page for eligibility under this program. 

Program-Specific Information 

Research on District Attorneys’ Pretrial Diversion Programs 

NIJ sponsors criminal court research and court-based program evaluation to identify 

tools, programs, and policies that satisfy criminal justice goals, including: public safety, 

cost-efficiency and fair and equitable treatment of victims and defendants. This objective 

falls under the court operations and case management area of NIJ’s criminal court 

research portfolio, which examines methods for criminal justice administration applicable 

to diversion, pretrial and other stages of the criminal case processing (see 

www.nij.gov/topics/courts/welcome.htm for more information). The focus of this objective 

is on the understudied topic of diversion programs placed at the front end of criminal 

case processing to minimize criminal justice system involvement and jail stays for less 

serious offenders. 

Pretrial diversion legislation enacted in States across the U.S. allows district attorneys’ 

(DAs’) offices to implement programs designed to remove eligible defendants from the 

criminal justice system. The goal is generally described as providing services to 

defendants who are amenable to rehabilitation and present a low public safety risk for 

the purpose of reducing criminal offending and conserving community and criminal 

justice resources. There is a high degree of variation in these prosecutor-led diversion 

4 
programs regarding: target populations, program terms, and noncompliance 

consequences. Most diversion programs target nonviolent misdemeanor defendants with 

minimal criminal histories. Defendants waive their constitutional right to a speedy trial 

and criminal proceedings are suspended. Programs require indefinite terms of a year or 

more of compliance with: payment of program, court, and service fees forfeited upon 

termination; employment or education enrollment; regular reporting to community 

supervision; financial support of dependents; and testing and substance abuse 

treatment. Upon successful program completion, the DA may file a nolle prosequi motion 

(commonly referred to as “nolle pros”) to drop the charges and dismiss the case. 

Otherwise, if the defendant does not complete the program, the case may be returned to 

court for traditional processing. 

This request for research on District Attorneys’ Pretrial Diversion Programs is to solicit 

applications for a single grant award to conduct a 30-month process, impact, and cost 

analysis of district attorneys’ pretrial diversion programs in multiple sites to examine a 

diversity of defendant samples and program designs. To be determined are the relative 

benefits associated with prosecutor-led pretrial diversion programs in contrast to 

traditional case processing or alternative programs for this target population. Research 

questions include: 

• Who is admitted and on what basis; what are the needs assessed and how; and 

what services are received? 

• What are compliance incentives and leverages, compliance rates, sources of 

noncompliance and responses? 

• What are program completion rates, who completes the program, and what are 

program termination consequences? 

• Does participation relate to recidivism during and after participation? 

• Do pretrial diversion programs minimize criminal justice system involvement, jail 

stays, and other disruptions to defendants’ lives? 

• What are the case and program costs for terminations and completions, and are 

there any savings associated with short- and long-term program impacts? 

NIJ anticipates that it will make a single grant award for a multisite evaluation to help 

ensure consistently high standards of methods and analytic rigor across sites. Sites 

should be proposed on the basis of clearly justified program design, stable resources, 

and caseflow sufficient for statistical analysis. An evaluation based on retrospective data 

would not support the research questions. The study must be prospective to collect 

equivalent information for the program and comparison samples, and followup beyond 

program participation for a cohort of sufficient sample size to support impact and cost 

analyses. Process evaluation for both program and comparison groups is similarly 

important to support cost analysis. If the program targets offenders with alcohol and 

other drug use issues, then both self-report and bioassay data must be collected. 

In their applications, researchers must: 

• State research questions that correspond clearly to proposed evaluation 

methods, data collection, analysis, and report plans; also, detail the measurable 

outcomes proposed. 

• Propose to develop logic models that illustrate the inputs, activities, outputs, 

short- and long-term outcomes, and external factors associated with each 

5 
program (see NIJ Web site for more information on program logic models at 

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/courts/drug-courts/measures-evaluation.htm

• Detail how qualitative and quantitative research methods will be applied, and how 

the information collected will be compiled and analyzed. 

• Describe potential data resources, and how those will be assessed to address 

potential validity and reliability concerns. 

• Demonstrate cultural competence in research protocol and capabilities that 

address geographic, racial/ethnic, language, and other relevant diversity issues. 

• Attach letters of commitment from each of the sites proposed, indicating consent 

to participate in this research project and to allow access to relevant State and 

local information resources. 

• Justify the comparison defendants proposed and detail equivalent information 

available for both program and comparison targets for impact or cost-efficiency 

analyses. 

• Attach a 30-month project timeline, beginning January 1, 2013 and including data 

and written deliverables 90 days prior to grant end date, and a briefing in month 

30 by the grantee and site representatives. 

A Pilot Study on the Impact of Incarceration on Families of Adults Confined to 

Correctional Institutions 

Given the high number of individuals incarcerated in correctional institutions, many 

families affected by incarceration may become involved in other public systems and 

become subsequent recipients of public services, including but not limited to: juvenile 

justice, mental health, public health, employment services, social and child welfare, and 

education. Families’ involvement in these systems is of significant research and policy 

interest to the criminal justice field. 

Operational or administrative datasets provide a cost-effective opportunity to explore 

intersections among the various systems and the criminal justice implications of those 

intersections. Understanding the involvement in and use of these systems could 

enhance the coordination and efficient delivery of services that may improve criminal 

justice outcomes and generate valuable information for criminal justice researchers, 

policymakers, and practitioners. 

For this focus area, NIJ solicits a pilot study (no more than one jurisdiction) on the 

impact of incarceration on families of adults confined to correctional institutions. Two 

methods of research are suggested: (a) the collection of data from available systems 

that provide information on incarcerated individuals and their families (data which should 

be linked and merged for future use by researchers), and (b) an in-depth qualitative 

study of individuals or subgroups of individuals (e.g., children, primary care-givers, and 

foster families who are affected by the incarceration of a family member). Data collected 

for this pilot study should be able to explore a diverse set of factors that include, but are 

not limited to: criminal history; individual and family characteristics; child maltreatment; 

school stability and academic performance; the role of child placement and the role and 

interventions of social welfare systems within families; offender and family involvement 

in medical or mental health systems; offender rehabilitation and reunification with the 

family; and offender employment outcomes. Qualitative data should be used by the 

researcher to verify information collected in the quantitative portion of the study. NIJ 

strongly encourages the inclusion of sex offenders in this study. 

6 
The application should include a letter of intent or Memorandum of Understanding 

(MOU) between the applicant and the jurisdiction under exploration. The latter is 

preferred, but not required. The application should also include data sharing agreements 

between the applicant and the agencies from which data will be collected. When 

selecting a jurisdiction for exploration it is preferred, but not required, that the jurisdiction 

have a diverse racial and ethnic composition. 

Based on study findings, the successful applicant will be expected to produce a variety 

of audience-specific research and policy briefs, as well as recommendations for criminal 

justice practice. 

Impact of Video Visitation on Offenders and Their Families 

Video Visitation is a technological program that may be able to positively impact two 

critical issues in corrections and reentry policy. First, the potential negative influence of 

parental incarceration on children has been receiving increasing attention from 

researchers, criminal justice and public health practitioners, and Congress. Second, in 

the current fiscal climate the need for innovation in promoting desistance among 

offenders is stronger than ever. Research has identified the influence of strong familial 

and community connections in assisting desistance among offenders.1

 

Video conferencing technology may offer practitioners the ability to promote prosocial 

behavior among offenders, as well as reduce the negative impact of incarceration on the 

offenders’ children. The use of this technology is gaining attention due to the cost 

savings in terms of enhanced efficiency regarding supervision to and from the visitation. 

Two things are unclear, however: (1) What are the prosocial outcomes that video 

visitation can promote in the offender?, and (2) Is it cost-effective given these outcomes? 

NIJ seeks a study to help develop a comprehensive understanding of the benefits and 

current limitations of video visitation to improve offender and familial outcomes and 

public safety. Applicants are encouraged to, at a minimum, investigate the impact of 

video visitation on offender outcomes in two environments: (1) offender compliance with 

custodial rules while in an institutional setting, and (2) reduced recidivism after offender 

release. These questions will help determine if the efficiencies introduced by the 

technology are translating to more frequent and positive contact with family, which may 

lead to improved offender outcomes. The applicant will examine implementation and 

operating costs and evaluate the cost effectiveness of the program in relationship to the 

outcomes identified in the earlier part of the study. In order to accomplish this complex 

research program, both qualitative data from interviews of correctional personnel and 

offenders and quantitative data from administrative compliance and arrest data should 

be used. 

The proposal must include a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the 

applicant and the Department of Corrections for the participating jurisdiction(s) under 

exploration. The application should also include data sharing agreements between the 

applicant and the agencies from which data will be collected. When selecting a 

 

1 Visher, C., and S. Courtney. 2007. One Year Out, Experiences of Prisoners Returning to Cleveland. Washington, DC: 

The Urban Institute.

7 
jurisdiction for exploration it is preferred, but not required, that the jurisdiction have a 

diverse racial and ethnic inmate population composition. 

Based on study findings, the successful applicant will be expected to produce a variety 

of audience-specific research and policy briefs, as well as recommendations for criminal 

justice practice. Other standard deliverables, including but not limited to data archiving, 

the draft technical report, final technical report, and bi-annual progress reports, 

described in this solicitation apply.

Evidence-based Programs or Practices

In addressing the above research areas, applicants should note that 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 website 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 for this solicitation, up to $1 million 

may become available for one award under research on district-attorney pretrial 

diversion programs; up to $500,000 may become available for one award under the pilot 

study on the impact of incarceration on families; and up to $350,000 may become 

available for one award under the research on the impact of video visitation. All awards 

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

additional requirements that may be imposed by law. 

Applicants should be aware that the total period for an award ordinarily will not exceed 3 

years. 

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 

8 
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. 

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, federal 

funds may not be used to pay total cash compensation (salary plus 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 for SES employees is available at 

www.opm.gov/oca/12tables/indexSES.asp. Note: A recipient may compensate an 

employee at a higher 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 limitation on compensation rates allowable under an award may be waived on an 

individual basis at the discretion of the Director of the National Institute of Justice. An 

applicant requesting a waiver should include a detailed justification in the budget 

narrative of its 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 its budget. 

The justification should include the particular qualifications and expertise of the 

individual, the uniqueness of the service being provided, 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 

9 
customary rate for an individual with his/her qualifications and expertise, and for the 

work to be done. 

Minimization of Conference Costs 

No OJP funding can be used to purchase food and/or beverages for any meeting, 

conference, training, or other event. Exceptions to this restriction may be made only in 

cases where such sustenance is not otherwise available (i.e., extremely remote areas), 

or where a special presentation at a conference requires a plenary address where there 

is no other time for sustenance to be obtained. Such an exception would require prior 

approval from OJP. This restriction 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 impact direct payment of per diem 

amounts to individuals in a travel status under the organization’s travel policy. 

Updated Department of Justice and OJP guidance on conference planning, minimization 

of costs, and conference cost reporting will be forthcoming and will be accessible on the 

OJP website at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/funding.htm. 

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 by individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable 

costs. 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 

(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 in 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. Any award recipient will be required, post award, to provide the data 

requested in the “Data Grantee Provides” column so that OJP can calculate values for 

the “Performance Measures” column. (Submission of performance measures data is not 

required for the application.) Performance measures for this solicitation are as follows: 

 

10 
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. 

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 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, 

semi-annual 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)/document(s). 

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. 

How to Apply 

Applications will be submitted through Grants.gov is a “one-stop storefront” that provides 

a unified process for all customers of federal awards to find funding opportunities and 

11 
apply for funding. Complete instructions on how to register and submit an application 

can be found at www.Grants.gov. If the applicant experiences technical difficulties at any 

point during this process, 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 up to several weeks for first-time registrants to receive 

confirmation and a user password. OJP highly recommends that applicants start the 

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

package by the specified application deadline. 

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 

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 renewal of an existing award. 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, onetime activity. Obtain a DUNS number by calling Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–

5711 or by applying online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received 

within 1-2 business days. 

2. Acquire or renew registration with the Central Contractor Registration 

(CCR) database. OJP requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for 

federal financial assistance maintain current registrations in the CCR database. 

An applicant must be registered in the CCR to successfully register in 

Grants.gov. 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. 

Note, however, that applicants must update or renew their CCR registration 

annually to maintain an active status. Information about CCR registration 

procedures can be accessed at www.ccr.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 (EBiz POC). The E-Biz POC at the applicant organization must log into Grants.gov 

to confirm the applicant organization’s AOR. Note that there can be more than 

one AOR for the organization.

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 

12 
is 16.560, titled “National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and 

Development Project Grants,” and the funding opportunity number is NIJ-2012-

3092. 

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

this information. An applicant that expends any funds for lobbying activities must 

provide the detailed information requested on the form, Disclosure of Lobbying 

Activities (SF-LLL). An applicant that does 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 validation message will state whether the application has been 

received and validated, or rejected, with an explanation. Important: Applicants

are urged to submit applications 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 a rejection notification. 

Note: 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 

If an applicant experiences unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond the 

applicant’s control that prevent submission of its application by the deadline, the 

applicant must email 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 its application. The applicant must include in the e-mail: a description of the 

technical difficulties, a timeline of submission efforts, the complete grant application, the 

applicant DUNS number, and Grants.gov Help Desk tracking number(s) the applicant 

has received. Note: Requests are not automatically approved by NIJ. After the 

program office reviews all of the information submitted, and contacts the Grants.gov 

Help Desk to validate the technical issues reported, OJP will contact the applicant to 

either approve or deny the request to submit a late application. If the technical issues 

reported cannot be validated, the application will be rejected as untimely. 

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 Web site, (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, including firewalls. 

13 
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. 

What an Application Should Include 

Applicants should anticipate that failure to submit an application that contains all of the 

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

decision be made to make an award, it may result in the inclusion of special conditions 

that preclude access to or use of award funds pending satisfaction of the conditions. 

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications that are unresponsive to the 

scope of the solicitation, or that do not include application elements designated by NIJ 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. The Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail 

Worksheet may be combined in one document. However, if only one document is 

submitted, it must contain both narrative and detail information. 

OJP strongly recommends use of appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., “Program 

Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative,” “Timelines,” “Memoranda of 

Understanding,” “Resumes”) for all attachments. OJP recommends that resumes be 

included in a single file. 

1. Information to complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF–424) 

The SF–424 is a standard form required for use as a cover sheet for submission 

of pre-applications, 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. Program Narrative 

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 30 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, 

noncompliance may be considered in peer review and in final award decisions. 

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. Project Abstract (not counted against the 30-page program narrative 

limit). 

14 
The 400 to 600-word abstract should state the problem under 

investigation (including research goals and objectives) and the anticipated 

relevance of the project to criminal justice public policy, practice, or 

theory. 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, and devices. 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. 

c. 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. 

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

program narrative limit). 

e. 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. 

• 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. 

f. 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. 

15 
• 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-certificateguidance.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 are 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 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: 

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

 

16 
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 as a 

private person: 

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

o A copy of the consent form that was used. 

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

funding agency). 

o Documentation of IRB approval. Any information transfer agreement that 

was used to transfer the data to 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. 

3. 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. If the budget is submitted in a 

different format, the budget categories listed in the sample budget worksheet 

should be included. 

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. 

 

17 
b. Budget Narrative 

The Budget Narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category 

of expense listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. Proposed budgets are 

expected to be complete; reasonable and allowable; cost effective; and 

necessary for project activities. The narrative should be mathematically 

sound and correspond with the information and figures provided in the 

Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how all costs were 

estimated and calculated 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 application proposes a voluntary match amount, the match 

amount incorporated into the OJP-approved budget becomes mandatory and 

subject to audit. 

4. 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.) A copy 

of the rate approval should be attached. If the applicant does not have an 

approved rate, one can be requested by contacting the applicant’s 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 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. 

5. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

If an application is being submitted by either (1) a tribe or tribal organization or 

(2) a third party proposing to provide direct services or assistance to residents on 

tribal lands, then a current authorizing resolution of the governing body of the 

tribal entity or other enactment of the tribal council or comparable governing body 

authorizing the inclusion of the tribe or tribal organization and its membership 

should be included with the application. In those instances when an organization 

or consortium of tribes proposes to apply for a grant on behalf of a tribe or 

multiple specific tribes, then the application should include a resolution (or 

comparable legal documentation, as may be applicable) from all tribes that will 

be included as a part of the services/assistance provided 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 authorizing resolution or 

other enactment of each tribal governing body) may submit a copy of its 

consortium bylaws with the application in lieu of tribal resolutions (or comparable 

legal documentation, as may be applicable). 

18 
6. Other Standard Forms

Additional forms that may be required 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 this form in GMS prior to the 

receipt of any award funds. 

c. Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (required 

for 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; this form must be downloaded, completed, and submitted) 

Selection Criteria 

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

1. Clarity of problem statement.

2. Identification of gaps in existing 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. 

2. Soundness of methods 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 (cost-effectiveness). 

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

 3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs. 

19 
Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation (Relevance to policy and practice)—20% 

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 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. 

Research Independence and Integrity 

Regardless of a proposal’s rating under the criteria outlined above, in order to receive 

funds, the applicant’s proposal must demonstrate research independence, including 

appropriate safeguards to ensure research objectivity and integrity. 

For purposes of this solicitation, research independence and integrity pertains only to 

ensuring that the design, conduct, or reporting of research funded by NIJ grants, 

cooperative agreements, or contracts will not be biased by any financial interest on the 

part of the investigators responsible for the research or on the part of the applicant. 

In the appendix dealing with research independence and integrity, the applicant must 

explain the process and procedures that the applicant has put in place to identify and 

manage potential financial conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, and/or 

subrecipients. It must also identify any potential organizational financial conflicts of 

interest on the part of the applicant with regard to the proposed research. If the applicant 

believes that there are no potential organizational financial conflicts of interest, the 

applicant must provide a brief narrative explanation of why it believes that to be the 

case. 

20 
Where potential organizational financial conflicts of interest exist, in the appendix the 

applicant must identify the safeguards the applicant has put in place to address those 

conflicts of interest. 

Considerations in evaluating research 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. 

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 under this solicitation. 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 wellversed or has expertise in the subject matter of this solicitation. Applications that meet 

basic minimum requirements 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 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, conducts a 

financial review of 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 also may give consideration to 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 strongly encourages applicants to review the 

information pertaining to 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. 

 

21 
• Civil Rights Compliance 

• 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 (FFATA) of 2006 

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

• Active CCR Registration 

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. 

22 
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. 

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 Strategy section of the proposal. 

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, application submission process, 

and/or the application review/peer review process. Feedback can be provided to 

OJPSoliciationFeedback@usdoj.gov. 

23 
24 

Application Checklist 

Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems 

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 14) 

_____ Program Narrative (see page 14) 

_____ Appendices to the Program Narrative (see page 15) 

_____ 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 

_____ Human Subjects Protection Paperwork 

_____ Privacy Certificate 

_____ 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 

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

proposal 

 has been submitted 

_____ Data Archiving Plan 

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 17)

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 18) 

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 13) 

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 18) 

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 18) 

_____ Other Standard Forms as applicable (see page 19), including: 

 _____ Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable)