Notices regarding the solicitation “Evaluation of Project Safe 

Neighborhoods”

February 25, 2019: The link to the DOJ Grants Financial Management Online Training under 

“Financial Management and System of Internal Controls” was updated.

February 19, 2019: Information regarding submission of information pertaining to disclosure and 

justification for DOJ High Risk Grantees was redacted.

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

Office of Justice Programs Approval Expires 11/30/2020 

National Institute of Justice 

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

Justice (NIJ) is seeking applications for funding a multi-site evaluation to assess the 

effectiveness of the Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) program. PSN is a Department of 

Justice-sponsored initiative that involves cooperation of multiple criminal justice agencies and 

their partners working at the local level to develop and implement strategic responses to reduce 

violent crime, with specific emphasis on gun crime. This evaluation project will include between 

eight (8) and ten (10) local site-level evaluations as well as one national assessment of PSN. 

This program furthers the Department’s mission by building knowledge about the effectiveness 

of violence reduction approaches.

Evaluation of Project Safe Neighborhoods 

Applications Due: May 1, 2019 

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, federally recognized 

Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions (as determined by the 

Secretary of the Interior), nonprofit and for-profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit and 

for-profit organizations), institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher 

education), and certain qualified individuals. Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and 

foreign colleges and universities are not eligible to apply. 

All recipients and subrecipients (including any for-profit organization) must forgo any profit or 

management fee. 

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

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

(subgrantees).1

 The applicant must be the entity that would have primary responsibility for 

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

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

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

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

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

NIJ may elect to fund applications submitted under this FY 2019 solicitation in future fiscal 

years, dependent on, among other considerations, the merit of the applications and on the 

availability of appropriations. 

 

1

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

and Submission Information. 
2 

NIJ-2019-15403 

Deadline 

Applicants must register with Grants.gov at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html

prior to submitting an application. All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on 

May 1, 2019. 

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

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

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

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

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

problems that may have caused a rejection notification. 

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

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

Information. 

Contact Information 

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

Support Hotline at 800-518-4726, 606-545-5035, at 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html, or via email to support@grants.gov. The

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

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

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

below within 24 hours after the application deadline to request approval to submit its 

application. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears under Experiencing 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Grants.gov number assigned to this solicitation: NIJ-2019-15403

Release date: February 13, 2019 
3

NIJ-2019-15403

Contents

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

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

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

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products ........................................ 9

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

Evaluation Research .............................................................................................................11

B. Federal Award Information....................................................................................................11

Type of Award .......................................................................................................................12

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls........................................................12

Budget Information ................................................................................................................13

Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement.................................................................................13

Pre-agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs) .......................................................14

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver...............................14

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...................15

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)...................................................15

C. Eligibility Information.............................................................................................................15

D. Application and Submission Information...............................................................................15

What an Application Should Include ......................................................................................15

How to Apply .........................................................................................................................30

E. Application Review Information.............................................................................................34

Review Criteria ......................................................................................................................34

Review Process.....................................................................................................................36

F. Federal Award Administration Information ............................................................................38

Federal Award Notices ..........................................................................................................38

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements ............................................38

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements..............................39

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...................................................................................39

H. Other Information..................................................................................................................40

Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) ....................40

Provide Feedback to OJP......................................................................................................40

Application Checklist .............................................................................................................41
4

NIJ-2019-15403

Evaluation of Project Safe Neighborhoods

(CFDA No. 16.560)

A. Program Description

Overview

NIJ is seeking applications for funding a multi-site evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the 

Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN) program. PSN is a Department of Justice-sponsored 

initiative that involves cooperation of multiple criminal justice agencies and their partners 

working at the local level to develop and implement strategic responses to reduce gun crime. 

PSN prioritizes the leadership of United States Attorney Offices in coordinating local efforts and 

carrying out federal prosecutions. This evaluation project will include between eight (8) and ten 

(10) local site-level evaluations, as well as one national assessment of PSN. NIJ intends to 

make one award under this solicitation for a project that will have two phases, with the 

opportunity for additional funding for the second phase to begin in FY 2021.

Applications proposing evaluation projects involving research partnerships with criminal justice 

agencies must include a strong letter of support from each of those agencies. Each letter of 

support must include the concurrence of the cooperating agency(ies) to archive any relevant 

study data in the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD) at the conclusion of the 

award (see Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products below). If 

selected for an award, applicants will be expected to have formal agreements in place with 

partnering agencies by January 1, 2020. Those agreements must include a provision to meet 

the data archiving requirements of the award. In rare circumstances, for example, where law 

prohibits the archiving of agency data, NIJ may agree to a successful application creating and 

archiving an appropriate synthetic dataset. Those circumstances will be rare, decided by NIJ on 

a case-by-case basis, and will require extensive documentation and justification for exceptions 

to be made.

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

authority provided by a full-year appropriations act for FY 2019. As of the writing of this 

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

no full-year appropriation for the Department has been enacted for FY 2019.

Program-Specific Information

This solicitation seeks applications for funding for a single, multi-site evaluation project to 

assess the effectiveness of the PSN program. PSN is a gun crime reduction initiative that was 

originally launched by the Department of Justice in 2001. In October 2017, the Attorney General 

announced the reinvigoration of the PSN program, calling it the centerpiece of the Department’s 

crime reduction strategy. The announcement described ways that the program has been 

enhanced and updated, and that further emphasis has been placed on the role of U.S. 

Attorneys, the use of new technologies, and partnerships with local communities.2In the same 

 

2 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-sessions-announces-reinvigoration-project-safe-neighborhoodsand-other.
5

NIJ-2019-15403

month, the Attorney General sent a memorandum to all U.S. Attorneys reestablishing PSN and 

articulating priorities and principles for the program.3

The goal of the enhanced PSN is to bring together all levels of law enforcement and the 

communities they serve to reduce violent crime and make neighborhoods safer. The PSN 

approach is intended to be comprehensive and include prevention, enforcement, and reentry 

efforts. U.S. Attorneys and their partners, including federal, state, local, and tribal law 

enforcement and prosecutors, are expected to create strategic plans for operationalizing PSN 

within their districts. These plans are developed to be tailored to the specific needs, issues, and 

resources in the district. Under PSN, U.S. Attorneys exercise overall leadership for violence 

reduction strategies, while continuing to focus on their primary roles of investigating and 

prosecuting crimes. They are expected to bring the full extent of criminal sanctions to bear on 

violent offenders, deter further crime, and empower law enforcement and community partners, 

including, for example, community groups, victims’ advocates, law enforcement agencies, and

academic research entities.

PSN is comprised of a number of mandatory strategic guidelines with the expectation that 

considerable variation will occur across districts. U.S. Attorneys are expected to work with 

partners to develop and implement plans — based on five principles — to address the most 

significant violent crime in the district. The five principles are:

1. Leadership – The U.S. Attorney should provide strong personal leadership and 

commitment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office to take a leadership role in developing and 

implementing the program.

2. Partnership – The U.S. Attorney’s Office should work in partnership with a wide range of 

engaged stakeholders, including vital partnerships with federal, state, local, and tribal 

law enforcement and prosecutors. Community support and robust partnerships with 

community groups and victim advocates are also deemed to be integral.

3. Targeted and Prioritized Enforcement – Focused enforcement efforts should harness 

the full range of available information and technology to identify locations within U.S. 

Attorney districts that have the greatest needs for violent crime reduction and the 

offenders who are driving violence in those areas.

4. Prevention of Additional Violence – PSN places enforcement at the heart of violent 

crime reduction efforts, but also asserts that prevention and deterrence of additional 

crime are required for lasting impact. Such efforts may include public awareness 

activities, focused-deterrence messages to offenders, and locally-based prevention and 

reentry efforts.

5. Accountability – U.S. Attorneys are expected to be accountable for results, closely 

follow the effects of their efforts in the local communities, and adjust their approach as 

necessary.

 

3 https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1001581/download.
6

NIJ-2019-15403

In October, 2018, the Department announced $30 million in grant awards to support the PSN 

program, through funding administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).4

Approximately $18 million of this funding was distributed through formula awards to all 94 U.S. 

Attorney districts under BJA’s 2018 PSN grant announcement.5 BJA also supported a PSN 

Suite of programs in 2018, which focused on reducing violent crime. Funding for these 

programs was intended to be used in coordination with, and to advance, PSN activities already 

under way in U.S. Attorney Districts. The BJA-funded PSN Suite included the following 

programs:

 Innovations in Community-Based Crime Reduction (CBCR).

6

 Supporting Innovation: Field-Initiated Programs to Improve Officer and Public Safety.

7

 Local Law Enforcement Crime Gun Intelligence Center Integration Initiative.

8

 Strategies for Policing Innovation.

9

 Technology Innovation for Public Safety (TIPS) Addressing Precipitous Increases in 

Crime.

10

 Innovative Prosecution Solutions for Combating Violent Crime and Illegal Opioids.

11

Although not officially part of the PSN Suite of programs, BJA also encouraged grant recipients 

under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program to coordinate with 

U.S. Attorneys Offices and PSN grantees in order to leverage funding for violence reduction 

projects.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) also funded two programs 

in FY 2018 as part of the PSN Suite. These included:

 Gang Suppression: A Law Enforcement and Prosecutorial Approach to Address Gang 

Recruitment of Unaccompanied Alien Children.

12

 Gang Suppression Planning Grants Program.

13

Evaluating PSN

NIJ is seeking to make a single award to conduct a multi-level, multi-site evaluation of PSN. The 

evaluation will be multi-level in the sense that it will include a national assessment as well as 

multiple local site-level evaluations. It will be multi-site in the sense that local evaluations will be 

 

4 https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-awards-more-30-million-project-safe-neighborhoods-combatviolent-crime.

5 https://www.bja.gov/funding/PSNFormula18.pdf.

6 https://www.bja.gov/funding/CBCR18.pdf.

7 https://www.bja.gov/funding/Field18.pdf.

8 https://www.bja.gov/funding/CGIC18.pdf.

9 https://www.bja.gov/funding/SPI18.pdf.

10 https://www.bja.gov/funding/TIPS18.pdf.

11 https://www.bja.gov/funding/InnovativeProsecution18.pdf.

12 https://www.ojjdp.gov/grants/solicitations/FY2018/GangUAC.pdf.

13 https://www.ojjdp.gov/grants/solicitations/FY2018/GangPlan.pdf.
7

NIJ-2019-15403

conducted in 8 to 10 PSN sites. NIJ seeks to develop strong evidence on the effectiveness of 

the PSN program in reducing violent crime, as well as valuable information about the variables 

that influence the effectiveness of PSN at the national and local levels. The evaluation should 

assess both program implementation and program outcomes. It should utilize both quantitative 

and qualitative methods. NIJ strongly encourages applicants to propose a multidisciplinary

advisory board comprised of researchers and practitioners to help guide the development and 

execution of this evaluation.

NIJ has identified high-level research questions to inform the evaluation strategy. These 

questions are not intended to be exhaustive and applicants should modify or propose additional 

research questions, as necessary.

Research questions related to outcomes:

 How did PSN affect violent crime rates nationwide?

 How did PSN affect violent crime in individual districts?

 To what extent were differences in violent crime outcomes associated with:

o PSN strategies and activities;

o The types of violent crime targeted;

o The characteristics of the communities that are targeted and prioritized;

o The composition of the local PSN task force;

o The inclusion of a research partner;

o The leadership and activities of the U.S. Attorney’s Office?

Research questions related to implementation:

 What direction, guidance, and resources did DOJ make available to U.S. Attorney 

districts implementing PSN?

 How were the five PSN program principles implemented across U.S. Attorney districts?

 What were the primary ways in which implementation of PSN varied across districts?

 Who were the primary PSN partners and how did partnerships function?

National Assessment: The primary purpose of the national assessment is to produce an 

estimate of the national effect of PSN on violent crime. The evaluator will be expected to 

analyze information relevant to PSN programs across all U.S. Attorney districts. This 

assessment will incorporate data provided by U.S. Attorney-led PSN task forces, data available 

through public sources, and information provided by DOJ personnel involved in administering 

PSN.
8

NIJ-2019-15403

 Data and information provided by PSN task forces to DOJ/NIJ will be made available for 

the purposes of this evaluation. This will include violent crime data for the targeted 

geographic areas in the form of monthly counts of homicides, robberies, aggravated 

assaults, rapes, and non-fatal shootings beginning in October 2015.14 Task forces will 

also provide to DOJ/NIJ information on their strategic plans, program implementation 

information (e.g., partners engaged, strategies and tactics utilized), and prosecution 

filings.

 Data available through public sources may include FBI UCR data and a range of other 

data sources, such as local hospital data on patients treated at the Emergency 

Department for violence related injuries and data from the Chief Medical Examiner on 

violence related mortality.

 DOJ personnel involved in administering PSN will provide additional information related 

to PSN program implementation, resources, and guidance. The evaluator should also 

plan to collect such information through direct observation and participation during PSN 

conferences, meetings, conference calls, video conferences, etc.

Site-level Evaluations: The primary purpose of the site-level evaluations is to provide a more 

rigorous and detailed analysis of the effectiveness of PSN as a violent crime reduction strategy 

within local communities. Each individual site-level evaluation should include a detailed, multimethod case study of program implementation, violent crime outcomes, and local factors that 

may affect implementation and violent crime. For each site-level evaluation, the evaluator 

should create a rigorous quasi-experimental design in which at least one matched comparison 

area is identified for each geographic area targeted by the PSN task force. Adjacent geographic 

areas should also be considered for analysis as potentially viable comparisons, and for analysis 

of possible crime displacement.

Site-level evaluations provide the opportunity to address much more specific research questions 

related to the opportunities and challenges confronted by PSN programs, and the local factors 

that influence effectiveness. Careful attention should be paid to central program components 

such as the leadership of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the composition and functioning of the Task 

Force, and the use of data and technology to help establish and refine the strategic plan and 

program activities. Case studies should also examine community-level factors that may affect 

implementation or outcomes, as well as community responses to PSN activities.

To the extent possible, the PSN evaluator should anticipate and work to ameliorate the data 

collection burden for local participating sites. This should include budgeting for costs within the 

evaluation to support data collection at the local level. Applicants are also strongly encouraged 

to plan for a high level of engagement with PSN personnel in the participating local sites in order 

to produce quality evaluation findings with a high degree of practical relevance. This includes 

planning for regular site visits and/or maintaining an ongoing presence in local evaluation sites. 

It also includes providing annual interim reports back to participating sites (see Interim Reports 

below).

The selected PSN evaluator will work with NIJ and others at DOJ to identify the 8-10 local sites 

for participation in the site-level evaluations. Local sites will be selected based on criteria yet to 

be fully determined, but which will likely include sites with high capacity for supporting rigorous 

 

14 October 2015 is three years prior to the Attorney General’s announcement of the enhanced approach to PSN. This 

is intended to serve as a three-year baseline period.
9

NIJ-2019-15403

evaluations and diversity in terms of geography and violent crime challenges. Applicants should 

propose additional criteria or methods as appropriate for informing the selection of local 

evaluation sites.

Evaluation Project Period and Program Performance Period: NIJ intends to fund the 

evaluation of PSN in two phases. The project period for the evaluation will begin on January 1, 

2020 (for more information see Federal Award Information below). Applicants should set the 

project period for the first phase of this evaluation for 24 months. If NIJ should decide to fund 

the second phase of the evaluation, it will also be for 24 months, bringing the full project period 

to 48 months. During the first year of this project, NIJ anticipates that the evaluation effort will 

require six-to-nine months to complete tasks such as site selection, planning with site 

personnel, obtaining letters of support from all PSN participating agencies and partners, 

instrument development, and Institutional Review Board approval. Data collection for the 

evaluation will include both retrospective and prospective data. Retrospective data collection will 

go back to October 2015, three years prior to the start of the PSN program, as noted above. 

Applicants should anticipate prospective data collection to last no-less-than 24 months. The 

remaining project period should be used to collect additional prospective data if possible, 

conduct analyses, and prepare final reports.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

The goal of this solicitation is to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the PSN program in terms 

of reducing violent crime. The primary objectives are to produce a national level assessment 

and 8-10 local level, rigorous evaluations. The deliverables from this solicitation will consist of 

published works that speak to these objectives.

Interim Reports. Any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be expected to produce 

annual interim reports focused on the national assessment of PSN and each of the local PSN 

sites participating in the evaluation. These reports should be prepared to benefit local and 

federal personnel who administer PSN, but should also be suitable for public release. Analyses 

and data presentations within these reports should address performance data, violent crime 

patterns, prosecutions, program activities, and partnerships. These reports are intended to 

supplement, and not replace, local level analyses and tracking of crime and performance 

indicators at PSN sites, which is expected to continue on an ongoing basis as a normal part of 

programmatic activity. The application should describe how the applicant plans to prepare and 

deliver these interim reports. Applicants may also propose additional methods for conveying 

findings to practitioner and policy maker audiences.

Final Research Report. Any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be expected to 

submit a combined final evaluation report that includes a full description of the methods and 

findings from the national assessment and all site level evaluations. Additional information on 

the final research report requirement for the solicitation is posted on NIJ’s webpage.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Submission Information.
10

NIJ-2019-15403

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

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

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

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

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

inventions, or similar scientific products.

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

performance measures that demonstrate the results of the work completed.

Performance Measures

OJP will require each successful applicant to submit regular performance data that demonstrate 

the results of the work carried out under the award (see “General Information about PostFederal Award Reporting Requirements” in Section F. Federal Award Administration 

Information). 

Applicants should visit OJP’s performance measurement page at www.ojp.gov/performance for 

an overview of performance measurement activities at OJP.

The application should demonstrate the applicant’s understanding of the performance data 

reporting requirements for this grant program and detail how the applicant will gather the 

required data should it receive funding. 

Please note that applicants are not required to submit performance data with the application. 

Performance measures information is included as an alert that successful applicants will be 

required to submit performance data as part of the reporting requirements under an award.

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Recipient Provides

Conduct research 

in social and 

behavioral 

sciences having 

clear implications 

for criminal justice 

policy and practice 

in the United 

States. 

1.Relevance to the needs of the field as 

measured by whether the project’s 

substantive scope did not deviate from the 

funded project or any subsequent agencyapproved modifications to the scope.

2.Quality of the research as demonstrated by 

the scholarly products that result in whole or 

in part from work funded under the NIJ award, 

such as published, peer-reviewed, scientific 

journal articles, and/or (as appropriate for the 

funded project) law review journal articles, 

book chapter(s) or book(s) in the academic 

press, technological prototypes, patented 

inventions, or similar scientific products.*

3.Quality of management as measured by such 

factors as whether significant project 

milestones were achieved, reporting and 

other deadlines were met, and costs 

remained within approved limits.

1. Quarterly financial reports, 

semi-annual and final 

progress reports, and 

products of the work 

performed under the NIJ 

award (including, at minimum, 

a final research report).

If applicable, an annual audit 

report

2. List of citation(s) to all 

scholarly products that 

resulted in whole or in part 

from work funded under the 

NIJ award.

3. If applicable, each data set

that resulted in whole or in 

part from work funded under 

the NIJ award.
11

NIJ-2019-15403

Evaluation Research

If an application includes an evaluation research component (or consists entirely of evaluation 

research), the application is expected to propose the most rigorous evaluation design 

appropriate for the research questions to be addressed. If the primary purpose of the evaluation 

is to determine the effectiveness or impact of an intervention (e.g., program, practice, or policy), 

the most rigorous evaluation designs may include random selection and assignment of 

participants (or other appropriate units of analysis) to experimental and control conditions. In 

cases where randomization is not feasible, applicants should propose a strong quasiexperimental design that can address the risk of selection bias. 

Applications that include evaluation research should consider the feasibility of including 

cost/benefit analysis. In cases where evaluations find that interventions have produced the 

intended benefit, cost/benefit analysis provides valuable and practical information for 

practitioners and policymakers that aids decisionmaking.

Evaluation research projects may also address a wide range of research questions beyond 

those focused on the effectiveness or impact of an intervention. Different research designs may 

be more appropriate for different research questions and at different stages of program 

development. The intervention strategies, setting, other contextual factors, and resources 

should be taken into account when selecting an evaluation design. In all cases, applications are 

expected to propose the most rigorous evaluation design appropriate for the research questions 

to be addressed.

Applicants are encouraged to review evidence rating criteria at

https://www.crimesolutions.gov/about_starttofinish.aspx for further information on high-quality 

evaluation design elements.

B. Federal Award Information

NIJ expects to make a single award under this solicitation, with an estimated total amount 

awarded of up to $3 million.This award will cover costs for the first phase of a two-phase project. 

NIJ intends to fund this project incrementally, with the first phase of funding available through 

this solicitation, and a second phase of funding in a similar amount available in FY 2021. In 

making decisions regarding an award for phase two, NIJ will consider, among other factors, the 

availability of appropriations, DOJ strategic priorities, and performance of the award recipient 

both in terms of the management of the award and the progress of the work under the award.

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

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

required of the recipient, applicants should propose an award start date of January 1, 2020.

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

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

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

narrative, expected scholarly products, timelines/milestones, and budget detail worksheet and 

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

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

amount or length of time anticipated for an individual award (or awards) under this solicitation.) 
12

NIJ-2019-15403

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

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

would be productive. (If, in FY 2019, NIJ elects to fund only certain phases of a proposed 

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

vary from those described above.)

NIJ’s decisions regarding future funding for applications only partially funded in FY 2019, will 

consider, among other factors, the availability of appropriations, when the program or project 

was last competed, OJP’s strategic priorities, and OJP’s assessment of both the management 

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

work funded under the award.

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

additional requirements that may be imposed by law.

Type of Award

NIJ expects to make any award under this solicitation in the form of a grant. See Administrative, 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cooperative Agreements – FY 2018 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center at 

https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

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

entities15) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements16 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 

200.303:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

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

Federal awards.

 

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

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

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

modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200.
13

NIJ-2019-15403 

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

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

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

noncompliance identified in audit findings.

(e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable

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

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

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

privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

To help ensure that applicants understand applicable administrative requirements and cost 

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

Financial Management Online Training, available at https://onlinegfmt.training.ojp.gov/. (This 

training is required for all OJP recipients.) 

Also, applicants should be aware that OJP collects information from applicants on their financial 

management and systems of internal controls (among other information) which is used to make 

award decisions. Under Section D. Application and Submission Information, applicants may 

access and review the OJP Financial Management and System of Internal Controls 

Questionnaire (https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/FinancialCapability.pdf) that OJP 

requires all applicants (other than an individual applying in his/her personal capacity) to 

download, complete, and submit as part of the application. 

Budget Information 

What will not be funded: 

 Applications primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (A budget may

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

demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.)

 Applications that are not responsive to this specific solicitation.

 Proposals that seek to develop technology for functional or operational purposes only.

 Research that lacks clear implications for criminal justice policy and/or practice in the

United States.

Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement 

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

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

This solicitation does not require a match. However, if a successful application proposes a 

voluntary match amount, and OJP approves the budget, the total match amount incorporated 

into the approved budget becomes mandatory and subject to audit. 
14

NIJ-2019-15403

Pre-agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs)

Pre-agreement costs are costs incurred by the applicant prior to the start date of the period of 

performance of the federal award.

OJP does not typically approve pre-agreement costs; an applicant must request and obtain the 

prior written approval of OJP for all such costs. All such costs incurred prior to award and prior to 

approval of the costs are incurred at the sole risk of the applicant. (Generally, no applicant should 

incur project costs before submitting an application requesting federal funding for those costs.) 

Should there be extenuating circumstances that make it appropriate for OJP to consider 

approving pre-agreement costs, the applicant may contact the point of contact listed on the title 

page of this solicitation for the requirements concerning written requests for approval. If approved

in advance by OJP, award funds may be used for pre-agreement costs, consistent with the 

recipient’s approved budget and applicable cost principles. See the section on “Costs Requiring 

Prior Approval” in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide at https://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/index.htm

for more 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, a recipient may 

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

employee of the recipient at a rate that exceeds 110 percent of the maximum annual salary 

payable to a member of the Federal Government’s Senior Executive Service (SES) at an 

agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.

17 The 2019 salary 

table for SES employees is available at the Office of Personnel Management website at 

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salarytables/19Tables/exec/html/ES.aspx. Note: A recipient may compensate an employee at a 

greater rate, provided the amount in excess of this compensation limitation is paid with nonfederal funds. (Non-federal funds used for any such additional compensation will not be 

considered matching funds, where match requirements apply.) If only a portion of an

employee’s time is charged to an OJP award, the maximum allowable compensation is equal to 

the percentage of time worked times the maximum salary limitation.

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

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

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

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

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

budget.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

2 C.F.R. Part 200.
15

NIJ-2019-15403

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

all food and beverage costs.

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

services, where appropriate.

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

Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements – FY 2018 

Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center at https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm.

C. Eligibility Information

For eligibility information, see title page.

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

Include” in Section D. Application and Submission Information.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

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

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

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

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

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

funds available.

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

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

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

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

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

Narrative, and resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel. (For purposes of this solicitation, “key 

personnel” means the principal investigator, and any and all co-principal investigators.)
16

NIJ-2019-15403

NOTE: OJP has combined the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative in a single 

document collectively referred to as the Budget Detail Worksheet. See “Budget Information and 

Associated Documentation” below for more information about the Budget Detail Worksheet and 

where it can be accessed.

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

“Program Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet,” “Timelines,” “Memoranda of Understanding,” 

“Resumes”) for all attachments. Also, OJP recommends that applicants include resumes in a 

single file.

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

applications are submitted in permitted formats.

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

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

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

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

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

To avoid processing delays, an applicant must include an accurate legal name on its SF424. On the SF-424, current OJP award recipients, when completing the field for “Legal 

Name” (box 8a), should use the same legal name that appears on the prior year award 

document (which is also the legal name stored in OJP’s financial system.) Also, current 

recipients should enter the Employer Identification Number (EIN) in box 8b exactly as it 

appears on the prior year award document. An applicant with a current, active award(s)

must ensure that its GMS profile is current. If the profile is not current, the applicant should 

submit a Grant Adjustment Notice updating the information on its GMS profile prior to 

applying under this solicitation. 

A new applicant entity should enter its official legal name in box 8a, its address in box 8d, its 

EIN in box 8b, and its Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number in box 8c of the 

SF-424. A new applicant entity should attach official legal documents to the application (e.g., 

articles of incorporation, 501(c)(3) status documentation, organizational letterhead) to 

confirm the legal name, address, and EIN entered into the SF-424. OJP will use the System 

for Award Management (SAM) to confirm the legal name and DUNS number entered in the 

SF-424; therefore, an applicant should ensure that the information entered in the SF-424 

matches its current registration in SAM. See the How to Apply section for more information 

on SAM and DUNS numbers.

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

Executive Order 12372. (In completing the SF-424, an applicant is to answer question 19 by 

selecting the response that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.”)

2. Project Abstract

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

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

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

project abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe the project. 
17

NIJ-2019-15403

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

project in 250-400 words. Project abstracts not submitted in the template below 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 the form’s standard 12-point font (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 this detailed template available at 

ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/ProjectAbstractTemplate.pdf. Formatting cannot be altered 

in this template; therefore, the above formatting requirements do not apply.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 30 double-spaced pages 

in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. If included in the main body of the program narrative, 

tables, charts, figures, and other illustrations count toward the 30-page limit for the narrative 

section. The project abstract, table of contents, appendices, and government forms do not 

count toward the 30-page limit.

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.18

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 name and complete contact information (that is, address, telephone 

number, and e-mail address) for both the applicant and the principal investigator.

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

limit).

If an applicant is resubmitting an application 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 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Information,” above.
18

NIJ-2019-15403

of the previous application, and (2) a brief summary of revisions to the application, 

including responses to previous feedback received from NIJ.

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 proposed project in depth. 

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

 Statement of the Problem and Research Questions. The statement of the problem 

should address the need for research in this area. Applicants should discuss current 

gaps in data, research, and knowledge, including those for particular justice sectors, 

for certain populations, and to answer questions relevant to current policy and 

practice needs and public interests. As part of this discussion, applicants should 

present a review of previous literature and discuss previous research related to these 

problems.

This section should also identify the proposed research questions and discuss the 

purpose, goals, and objectives of the proposed project.

 Project Design and Implementation. Applicants should provide a detailed description 

of the strategies to implement this research project and address the research 

questions. Design elements should follow directly from the research project’s goals 

and objectives and address the program-specific information noted on page 4. 

Applicants should describe the research methodology in detail and demonstrate the 

validity and usefulness of the data they will collect. Applicants should consider the 

rigor and soundness of the methodology and analytical and technical approaches for 

the proposed research and address the feasibility of the proposed project and 

potential challenges or problems in carrying out the activities.

 Potential Impact. Applicants should describe the potential impact of the research and 

how it may inform or improve criminal or juvenile justice-related policy, practice, or 

theory in the United States.

The discussion of impact should include a discussion of the deliverables, including 

planned scholarly products indicated in the program-specific information on page 9

and a plan for dissemination to appropriate audiences. Applicants should identify 

plans to produce or make available to broader interested practitioners and policy 

makers in a form that is designed to be readily accessible and useful to them. 

 Capabilities/Competencies. This section should describe the experience and 

capability of the applicant organization, key staff, and any proposed subgrantees 

(including consultants) that the applicant will use to implement and manage this effort 

and the federal funds under this award, highlighting any previous experience

implementing projects of similar scope, design, and magnitude. Applicants should 

address:
19

NIJ-2019-15403

o Experience and capacity to work with the proposed data sources in the conduct 

of similar research efforts.

o Experience and capacity to design and implement rigorous research and data

analysis projects.

o Experience producing and disseminating meaningful deliverables.

Applicants should also outline the management plan and organization that connects to 

the goals and objectives of the project.

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 project that are supplemental to such items included in the main 

body of the narrative.

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

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

significantly involved in substantive aspects of the proposed project (including, 

for example, individuals such as statisticians used to conduct proposed data 

analysis).

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

conflicts on the part of prospective reviewers of the application), a complete list of 

the individuals named or otherwise identified anywhere in the application 

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

advise or consult) on the proposed research, development, or evaluation project. 

This applies to all such individuals, including, for example, individuals who are or 

would be employees of the applicant or employees of any proposed subrecipient 

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

who may (or will) work without compensation (such as advisory board members). 

This appendix to the program narrative is to include, for each listed individual: 

name, title, employer, any other potentially-pertinent organizational affiliation(s), 

and the individual's proposed roles and responsibilities in carrying out the 

proposed project. If the application identifies any specific entities or organizations 

(other than the applicant) that will or may work (or advise or consult) on the 

proposed project, without also naming any associated individuals, the name of 

each such organization also should be included on this list. Applicants should 

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

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

this list.

If the application (including the budget) identifies any proposed non-competitive 

agreements that are or may be considered procurement "contracts" (rather than 

subawards) for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements the 

applicant also must list the entities with which the applicant proposes to 
20

NIJ-2019-15403

contract. Applicants should provide this list as a separate sheet entitled 

"Proposed non-competitive procurement contracts."

For information on distinctions — for purposes of federal grants administrative 

requirements — between subawards and procurement contracts under awards, 

see “Budget and Associated Documentation,” below.

 Proposed project timeline and expected milestones.

 Human Subjects Protection paperwork (documentation and forms related to 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) review). (See

nij.gov/funding/humansubjects/Pages/welcome.aspx) Note: Final IRB approval is 

not required at the time an application is submitted.

 Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to

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

 List of any previous and current NIJ awards to the applicant and investigator(s), 

including the NIJ-assigned award numbers and a brief description of any 

scholarly products that resulted in whole or in part from work funded under the 

NIJ award(s). (See “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly 

Products” under “Program-Specific Information,” above, for definition of “scholarly 

products.”)

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

has been submitted (if applicable).

 Applicants proposing to use incentives or stipends payments as part of their 

research project design, must submit an incentive or stipend approval request, as 

a separate document, according to the requirements set forth at 

https://www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/research-participant-costs-andincentives.aspx.

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

special award conditions, that data sets resulting in whole or in part from projects 

funded under this solicitation be submitted for archiving with the NACJD (See 

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

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

Plan” – to comply with data archiving requirements. The plan should provide brief 

details about proposed data management and archiving, including submission to

NIJ (through NACJD) of all files and documentation necessary to allow for 

future efforts by others to reproduce the project’s findings and/or to extend the 

scientific value of the data set through secondary analysis. Pertinent files and 

documentation include, among other things, qualitative and quantitative data

produced, instrumentation and data collection forms, codebook(s), any 

specialized programming code necessary to reproduce all constructed measures 

and the original data analysis, description of necessary de-identification 
21

NIJ-2019-15403

procedures, and (when required) a copy of the privacy certificate and informed 

consent protocols.

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

associated with meeting archiving requirements.

Note that required data sets are to be submitted on, or before, the end of the 

period of performance.

 Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and correctional agencies 

(if applicable).

4. Budget and Associated Documentation

The Budget Detail Worksheet and the Budget Narrative are now combined in a single 

document collectively referred to as the Budget Detail Worksheet. The Budget Detail 

Worksheet is a user-friendly, fillable, Microsoft Excel-based document designed to calculate 

totals. Additionally, the Excel workbook contains worksheets for multiple budget years that 

can be completed as necessary. All applicants should use the Excel version when 

completing the proposed budget in an application, except in cases where the 

applicant does not have access to Microsoft Excel or experiences technical 

difficulties. If an applicant does not have access to Microsoft Excel or experiences 

technical difficulties with the Excel version, then the applicant should use the 508-compliant 

accessible Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) version.

Both versions of the Budget Detail Worksheet can be accessed at 

https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Forms/BudgetDetailWorksheet.htm.

a. Budget Detail Worksheet

The Budget Detail Worksheet should provide the detailed computation for each budget 

line item, listing the total cost of each and showing how it was calculated by the 

applicant. For example, costs for personnel should show the annual salary rate and the 

percentage of time devoted to the project for each employee paid with grant funds. The 

Budget Detail Worksheet should present a complete itemization of all proposed costs.

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

see the DOJ Grants Financial Guide at https://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/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).

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

effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost 

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

example, a budget narrative should detail why planned in-person meetings are 
22

NIJ-2019-15403

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

used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.

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

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

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

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

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

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

c. Cofunding

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

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

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

The application should identify generally any such contributions that the applicant 

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

will be supported with non-federal contributions.

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

under Section B. Federal Award Information.

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

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

mandatory and subject to audit.

d. Information on Proposed Subawards (if any) and on Proposed Procurement 

Contracts (if any)

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

may propose to enter into procurement contracts under the award. 

Whether an action – for federal grants administrative purposes – is a subaward or 

procurement contract is a critical distinction as significantly different rules apply to 

subawards and procurement contracts. If a recipient enters into an agreement that is a 

subaward of an OJP award, specific rules apply – many of which are set by federal 

statutes and DOJ regulations; others by award conditions. These rules place particular 

responsibilities on an OJP recipient for any subawards the OJP recipient may make. The 

rules determine much of what the written subaward agreement itself must require or 

provide. The rules also determine much of what an OJP recipient must do both before 

and after it makes a subaward. If a recipient enters into an agreement that is a 

procurement contract under an OJP award, a substantially different set of federal rules 

applies.

OJP has developed the following guidance documents to help clarify the differences 

between subawards and procurement contracts under an OJP award and outline the 

compliance and reporting requirements for each. This information can be accessed 

online at https://ojp.gov/training/training.htm.

 Subawards under OJP Awards and Procurement Contracts under Awards: A 

Toolkit for OJP Recipients.
23

NIJ-2019-15403

 Checklist to Determine Subrecipient or Contractor Classification.

 Sole Source Justification Fact Sheet and Sole Source Review Checklist.

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

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

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

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

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

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

develop or modify, or will conduct part of the research or evaluation the recipient has 

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

subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements.

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

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

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

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

procurement contract under an award. The substance of the relationship should be given 

greater consideration than the form of agreement between the recipient and the outside 

entity.

1. Information on proposed subawards

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

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

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

authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward.

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

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

Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, and Budget Narrative as approved by 

OJP. If, however, a particular subaward is not authorized by federal statute or 

regulation, and is not approved by OJP, the recipient will be required, post-award, to 

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

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

award and program, the applicant should-- (1) identify (if known) the proposed 

subrecipient(s), (2) describe in detail what each subrecipient will do to carry out the 

federal award and federal program, and (3) provide a justification for the 

subaward(s), with details on pertinent matters such as special qualifications and 

areas of expertise. Pertinent information on subawards should appear not only in the 

Program Narrative, but also in the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative.

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

proposed noncompetitive contracts over $250,000)

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

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

for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements -- is considered a 
24

NIJ-2019-15403

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

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

including the Procurement Standards of the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements 

(as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.317 - 200.326). The Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget 

Narrative should identify proposed procurement contracts. (As discussed above, 

subawards must be identified and described separately from procurement contracts.) 

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

a general expectation that agreements that (for purposes of federal grants 

administrative requirements) constitute procurement “contracts” under awards will be 

entered into on the basis of full and open competition. All noncompetitive (sole 

source) procurement contracts must meet the OJP requirements outlined at 

https://ojp.gov/training/subawards-procurement.htm. If a proposed procurement 

contract would exceed the simplified acquisition threshold -- currently, $250,000 -- a 

recipient of an OJP award may not proceed without competition unless and until the 

recipient receives specific advance authorization from OJP to use a non-competitive 

approach for the procurement. An applicant that (at the time of its application) 

intends – without competition – to enter into a procurement contract that would 

exceed $250,000 should include a detailed justification that explains to OJP why, in 

the particular circumstances, it is appropriate to proceed without competition.

If the applicant receives an award, sole source procurements that do not exceed the 

Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently $250,000) must have written justification 

for the noncompetitive procurement action maintained in the procurement file. If a 

procurement file does not have the documentation that meets the criteria outlined in 

2 C.F.R. 200, the procurement expenditures may not be allowable. Sole source 

procurement over the $250,000 Simplified Acquisition Threshold must have prior 

approval from OJP using a Sole Source Grant Adjustment Notice (GAN). Written 

documentation justifying the noncompetitive procurement must be submitted with the 

GAN and maintained in the procurement file.

e. Pre-Agreement Costs

For information on preagreement costs, see Section B. Federal Award Information.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if:

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

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

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

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

copy of the indirect cost rate agreement to the application. An applicant that does not have a

current federally-approved rate may request one through its cognizant federal agency, which 

will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant entity, or, if the applicant’s 

accounting system permits, applicants may propose to allocate costs in the direct cost 

categories.
25

NIJ-2019-15403

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

please contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer Customer Service Center at 1-800-

458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, an applicant 

may obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal at 

https://www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.) For the “de minimis” rate requirements 

(including information on eligibility to elect to use the rate), see the Part 200 Uniform 

Requirements, at 2 C.F.R. 200.414(f).

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

an authorizing resolution or comparable legal documentation from each tribal governing 

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

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

applicant disclosure of high-risk status)

Every OJP applicant (other than an individual applying in his or her personal capacity) is 

required to download, complete, and submit the OJP Financial Management and System of 

Internal Controls Questionnaire (Questionnaire) at 

https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/FinancialCapability.pdf as part of its application. 

The Questionnaire helps OJP assess the financial management and internal control 

systems, and the associated potential risks of an applicant as part of the pre-award risk 

assessment process.

The Questionnaire should only be completed by financial staff most familiar with the 

applicant's systems, policies, and procedures in order to ensure that the correct responses 

are recorded and submitted to OJP. The responses on the Questionnaire directly impact the 

pre-award risk assessment and should accurately reflect the applicant’s financial 

management and internal control system at the time of the application. The pre-award risk 

assessment is only one of multiple factors and criteria used in determining funding.

However, a pre-award risk assessment that indicates that an applicant poses a higher risk to 

OJP may affect the funding decision and/or result in additional reporting requirements, 
26

NIJ-2019-15403

monitoring, special conditions, withholding of award funds, or other additional award 

requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The date the applicant was designated high risk.

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

and email address).

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

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

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

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

information in award decisions, and may impose additional OJP oversight of any award 

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

document).

8. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

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

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

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) posted at

https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/Disclosure.pdf. An applicant that does not expend 

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

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

9. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant disclosure of pending applications19

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(“subgrant”) federal funds).

 

19 Typically, the applicant is not the principal investigator. Rather, the applicant, most frequently, is the institution, 

organization, or company in which the principal investigator is employed.
27

NIJ-2019-15403 

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

multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement comprehensive 

programs or projects is encouraged and is not seen as inappropriate duplication. 

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

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

months: 

 The federal or State funding agency. 

 The solicitation name/project name. 

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

agency. 

SAMPLE

Federal or State 

Funding Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

Name/Phone/E-mail for Point of Contact 

at Federal or State Funding Agency

DOJ/Office of

Community Oriented 

Policing Services 

(COPS Office)

COPS Hiring 

Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000;

jane.doe@usdoj.gov

Health and Human 

Services/ Substance 

Abuse and Mental 

Health Services 

Administration

Drug-Free 

Communities 

Mentoring 

Program/North 

County Youth 

Mentoring 

Program

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

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

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

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

applications statement. 

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

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

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

cooperative agreements or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative 

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

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

submitted as part of this application.”
28

NIJ-2019-15403 

b. Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High Risk Grantees20 (if applicable) 

An applicant that is designated as a DOJ High Risk Grantee is to submit , as a 

separate attachment to its application, information that OJP will use, among other 

pertinent information, to determine whether it will consider or select the application for an 

award under this solicitation. The file should be named “DOJ High Risk Grantee 

Applicant Disclosure and Justification.” (See, also, “Review Process,” below, under 

Section E. Application Review Information, for a brief discussion of how such information 

may considered in the application review process.) 

OJP constantly seeks to optimize its investments in criminal- and juvenile justicefocused programs and activities, increase program effectiveness, and maximize the 

return – and program impact – from limited programmatic resources. Therefore, OJP 

may remove from consideration or not select for award a “DOJ High Risk Grantee” 

applicant that is determined to pose a substantial risk of program implementation failure. 

In making such determinations, OJP will consider one or more of the following factors: 

the applicant’s lack of sufficient progress in addressing required corrective actions 

necessary for removal of the DOJ High Risk Grantee designation; the nature and 

severity of the issues leading to or accompanying the applicant’s DOJ High Risk Grantee 

designation; or the applicant’s expected ability to manage grant funds and achieve grant 

goals and objectives. 

In this attachment, the applicant is to provide any additional information or justification –

especially with regard to corrective actions yet to be implemented (as of the application 

date) – that may help demonstrate how the applicant has addressed or otherwise 

mitigated such uncorrected matters, such that any negative impact on the proposed 

program and its implementation would be immaterial or would be significantly reduced or 

eliminated. (To the extent that the applicant believes that any of the information provided 

pursuant to this disclosure may be confidential in nature, the applicant should specifically 

identify it.) 

c. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity 

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

evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and 

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

applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

20 A “DOJ High Risk Grantee” is a recipient that has received a DOJ High-Risk designation based on a documented 

history of unsatisfactory performance, financial instability, management system or other internal control deficiencies, 

or noncompliance with award terms and conditions on prior awards, or that is otherwise not responsible. 
29

NIJ-2019-15403 

and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no such conflicts of 

interest – whether personal or financial or organizational (including on the part of 

the applicant entity or on the part of staff, investigators, or subrecipients) – that 

could affect the independence or integrity of the research, including the design, 

conduct, and reporting of the research. 

OR

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

applicant has identified – including through review of pertinent information on the 

principal investigator, any co-principal investigators, and any subrecipients – that 

could affect the independence or integrity of the research, including the design, 

conduct, or reporting of the research. These conflicts may be personal (e.g., on 

the part of investigators or other staff), financial, or organizational (related to the 

applicant or any subrecipient entity). Some examples of potential investigator (or 

other personal) conflict situations are those in which an investigator would be in a 

position to evaluate a spouse’s work product (actual conflict), or an investigator 

would be in a position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague 

(potential apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of 

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

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

technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the project 

(whether funded by OJP or other sources), because the organization in such an 

instance might appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own prior work. 

The key is whether a reasonable person understanding all of the facts would be 

able to have confidence that the results of any research or evaluation project are 

objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial interest that casts doubt 

on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or research product is a problem 

and must be disclosed. 

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

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

following two items: 

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

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

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

The applicant also is to include an explanation of the specific processes and 

procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put in place, to identify and 

prevent (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to 

the funded project during the period of performance. Documentation that may be 

helpful in this regard may include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and 

policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. 

There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed. 

OR

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

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

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

research, the applicant is to provide a specific and robust mitigation plan to 
30

NIJ-2019-15403 

address each of those conflicts. At a minimum, the applicant is expected to 

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

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

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

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

organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, 

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

any, will be accepted as proposed. 

OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on 

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

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

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

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

any such factors. 

How to Apply 

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

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

register and submit an application at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html. 

Applicants that experience technical difficulties during this process should call the Grants.gov 

Customer Support Hotline at 800-518-4726 or 606–545–5035, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 

days a week, except on federal holidays. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification. 

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

regarding this solicitation at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/manage-subscriptions.html. If 

this solicitation is cancelled or modified, individuals who sign up with Grants.gov for updates will 

be automatically notified. 

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

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

Support. 

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

“optional.” OJP receives all files attached in both categories. Attachments are also labeled to 

describe the file being attached (e.g., Project Narrative, Budget Narrative, Other). Please ensure 

that all required documents are attached in the correct Grants.gov category and are labeled 

correctly. Do not embed “mandatory” attachments within another file. 

An applicant must use the Add Attachment button to attach a file to its application. Do not click 

the paperclip icon to attach files. This action will not attach the files to the application. After 
31

NIJ-2019-15403 

adding an attachment, select the View Attachment button to confirm you attached the correct 

file. To remove the file, select the Delete Attachment button. 

An application can be checked for errors via the Check Application button on the Forms tab of 

the Manage Workspace page. The button is active if the set of forms in the workspace matches 

those required in the application package. If you receive a Cross-Form Errors message after 

clicking the Check Application button, refer to the Cross-Form Errors help article for more 

detailed information about this validation error. 

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

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

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

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

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

Characters

Upper case (A – Z)

Lower case (a – z)

Underscore (__)

Hyphen ( - )

Space

Period (.)

Special Characters Special Characters Special Characters

Parenthesis ( ) Curly braces { } Square brackets [ ]

Ampersand (&)* Tilde (~) Exclamation point (!)

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

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

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

*When using the ampersand (&) in XML, applicants must use the “&” format.

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

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

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

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

the application is rejected. 

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 

Unique Entity Identifier (DUNS Number) and System for Award Management (SAM) 

Every applicant entity must comply with all applicable SAM and unique entity identifier 

(currently, a DUNS number) requirements. SAM is the repository for certain standard 

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

number is a unique nine-digit identification number provided by the commercial company Dun 

and Bradstreet. More detailed information about SAM and the DUNS number is in the numbered 

sections below. 

If an applicant entity has not fully complied with the applicable SAM and unique identifier 

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

not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for making the 

award to a different applicant. 

Applying as an Individual 

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

funding opportunities for which individuals are eligible to apply. Use the Funding Opportunity 
32

NIJ-2019-15403 

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

applicable Grants.gov individual registration requirements.) 

Enter the FON at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/IndCPRegister to complete the registration 

form and create a username and password for Grants.gov. (An applicant applying as an 

individual should complete all steps except 1, 2, and 4.) 

Registration and Submission Steps 

1. Acquire a unique entity identifier (currently, a DUNS number). The Office of 

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

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

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

This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and to validate address and point 

of contact information for applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. It will be used throughout 

the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Call 

Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a DUNS number or apply online at 

www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 2 business days. 

2. Acquire or maintain registration with SAM. Any applicant for an OJP award creating a 

new entity registration (or updating or renewing a registration) in SAM.gov must submit an 

original, signed notarized letter appointing the authorized Entity Administrator within thirty 

(30) days of the registration activation. Notarized letters must be submitted via U.S. 

Postal Service Mail. Read the Alert at sam.gov/SAM/ to learn more about what is required 

in the notarized letter, and read the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) at 

www.gsa.gov/samupdate to learn more about this process change. All applicants for OJP 

awards (other than individuals) must maintain current registrations in the SAM database. 

Applicants will need the authorizing official of the organization and an Employer 

Identification Number (EIN). Information about SAM registration procedures can be 

accessed at sam.gov/SAM/. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and other entities, go to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organizationregistration.html. Individuals registering with Grants.gov should go to 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/registration.html.

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

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

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

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

that an organization can have more than one AOR.
33

NIJ-2019-15403 

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 and the funding 

opportunity number is NIJ-2019-15403.

6. Access Funding Opportunity and Application Package from Grants.gov. Select “Apply 

for Grants” under the “Applicants” column. Enter your email address to be notified of any 

changes to the opportunity package before the closing date. Click the Workspace icon to 

use Grants.gov Workspace.

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

in Grants.gov. To preview the application prior to (or after) submitting, go to the View 

Application tab in Workspace. For additional information, review the View Application Tab

help article and Attachments Tab help article. Within 24-48 hours after submitting the 

electronic application, the applicant should receive two notifications from Grants.gov. The 

first will confirm the receipt of the application. The second will state whether the application 

has been validated and successfully submitted, or whether it has been rejected due to 

errors, with an explanation. It is possible to first receive a message indicating that the 

application is received, and then receive a rejection notice a few minutes or hours later. 

Submitting an application well ahead of the deadline provides time to correct the problem(s)

that caused the rejection. Important: OJP urges each applicant to submit its application at 

least 72 hours prior to the application due date, to allow time to receive validation 

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

problems that may have caused a rejection notification. Applications must be successfully 

submitted through Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 1, 2019.

Go to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration.html for further 

details on DUNS numbers, SAM, and Grants.gov registration steps and timeframes. 

Note: Application Versions 

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

recent system-validated version submitted. 

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues 

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

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

Support Hotline at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html or the SAM Help Desk

(Federal Service Desk) at https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/home.do to report the technical issue and 

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

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

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

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

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

SAM tracking number(s). 

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

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

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

application has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application 
34

NIJ-2019-15403 

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

applicant’s request to submit its application. 

The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions: 

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

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

Grants.gov can take up to 48 hours.) 

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

website. 

 Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation. 

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

such as issues with firewalls or browser incompatibility. 

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

the top of the OJP Funding Resource Center at https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm. 

E. Application Review Information 

Review Criteria 

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

the following review criteria. Each individual criterion is assigned a different weight based on the 

percentage value listed. For example, the first criterion, Statement of the Problem, is worth 15

percent of the score in the assessment of the application’s technical merit. 

Statement of the Problem and Research Questions (Understanding of the problem, research 

questions, and their importance) – 15% 

1. Demonstrated understanding of the problem. 

2. Demonstrated importance of research questions, goals and objectives, including 

alignment with the aims of the solicitation. 

3. Demonstrated awareness of the state of current research. 

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

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

aim(s) of the proposed project. 

2. Feasibility of proposed project. 

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

actions to minimize and/or mitigate them. 

4. Feasibility of completing the deliverables noted in the solicitation. 
35

NIJ-2019-15403 

Potential Impact – 15% 

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

justice in the United States, such as: 

 Potential for significantly improved understanding of the stated criminal/juvenile justice 

problem. 

 Potential for innovative solution to address (all or a significant part of) the stated 

criminal/juvenile justice problem. 

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

applicant organization and proposed project staff) – 20% 

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (that is, the principal investigator, 

any and all co-principal investigators, and all other individuals (and organizations) 

identified in the application (regardless of “investigator” status) who will be significantly 

involved in substantive aspects of the proposed project). 

2. Demonstrated ability of the applicant organization to implement the proposed strategies 

and manage the effort. 

3. Relationship between the capabilities/competencies of the proposed project staff 

(including the applicant organization) and the scope and strategies of the proposed 

project. 

Budget 

In addition, peer reviewers will consider and may comment on the following additional items in 

the context of scientific and technical merit. 

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

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs. 

4. Alignment of the proposed budget with proposed project activities. 

5. Proposed plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, 

such as criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from 

the planned scholarly products of the project. 

Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the proposed project) 

Peer reviewers may comment—in the context of scientific and technical merit—on the proposed 

plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, such as 

criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from the planned 

scholarly products of the project. 
36

NIJ-2019-15403 

Review Process 

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for making awards. NIJ reviews the 

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

measurable, and achievable, as well as consistent with the solicitation. 

Peer reviewers will review the applications submitted under this solicitation that meet basic 

minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether an application meets basic 

minimum requirements and should proceed to further consideration, OJP screens applications 

for compliance with those requirements. Although specific requirements may vary, the following 

are common requirements applicable to all solicitations for funding under OJP programs: 

 The application must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant. 

 The application must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if 

applicable). 

 The application must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation. 

 The application must include all items designated as “critical elements.”

 The application, if submitted by an applicant that is a DOJ High Risk Grantee,21 or is 

designated “high risk” by a federal grant-making agency outside of DOJ, must not 

have been determined by the Director/Administrator to pose a substantial risk of 

program implementation failure, based on 1) the applicant’s lack of sufficient 

progress in addressing required corrective actions necessary for removal of the DOJ 

High Risk Grantee (or non-DOJ high risk) designation, 2) the nature and severity of 

the issues leading to or accompanying the DOJ High Risk Grantee (or non-DOJ high 

risk) designation, and/or 3) the applicant’s expected ability to manage grant funds 

and achieve grant goals and objectives. 

For a list of the critical elements for this solicitation, see “What an Application Should Include” 

under Section D. Application and Submission Information. 

Peer review panels will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum 

requirements. NIJ may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, 

to assess applications on technical merit using the solicitation’s review criteria. An internal 

reviewer is a current DOJ employee who is well-versed or has expertise in the subject matter of 

this solicitation. An external peer reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given 

solicitation who is not a current DOJ employee. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting 

recommendations are advisory only, although reviewer views are considered carefully. Other 

important considerations for NIJ include geographic diversity, strategic priorities, and available 

funding, as well as the planned scholarly products and the extent to which the Budget Detail 

Worksheet and Budget Narrative accurately explain project costs that are reasonable, 

necessary, and otherwise allowable under federal law and applicable federal cost principles. 

 

21 See “Applicant Disclosure and Justification - DOJ High Risk Grantees” under “What an Application Should Include,” 

above, for a definition of “DOJ High Risk Grantee.”
37

NIJ-2019-15403 

Pursuant to the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before award decisions are made, OJP also 

reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things to 

help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory 

record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the 

applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. In addition, if OJP 

anticipates that an award will exceed $250,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and 

consider any information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the 

integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee 

Performance and Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS"). 

Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any 

information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding 

agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other 

information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by the applicant. 

The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a 

framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants for competitive awards. OJP takes into 

account information pertinent to matters such as --

1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity. 

2. Quality of the applicant’s management systems, and applicant’s ability to meet 

prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial 

Guide. 

3. Applicant’s history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including scholarly 

products, and compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as 

awards from other federal agencies. 

4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the Part 200 

Uniform Requirements. 

5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively 

implement other award requirements. 

Note on applicants with a “high risk” designation: Risks associated with DOJ High Risk 

Grantees, or applicants designated as “high risk” by a federal grant-making agency outside of 

DOJ, are taken into account during the review process, and each applicant with such “high risk” 

designations will be considered for funding on a case-by-case basis, depending on the nature 

and severity of the issues that led to the DOJ High Risk Grantee (or non-DOJ high risk) 

designation, status of progress in addressing corrective actions, and expected ability to manage 

grant funds and achieve grant goals and objectives. A “high risk” designated applicant is to 

submit disclosure and justification documentation consistent with the requirements specified, 

above, under “What an Application Should Include” in Section C. Application and Submission 

Information. 

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

may take into account not only peer review ratings and NIJ recommendations, but also other 

factors as indicated in this section. 
38

NIJ-2019-15403 

F. Federal Award Administration Information 

Federal Award Notices 

Award notifications will be made by September 30, 2019. OJP sends award notifications by 

email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the 

authorizing official (E-Biz POC and AOR). The email notification includes detailed instructions 

on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award 

acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on 

the award date. 

For each successful applicant, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant 

will be required to login; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances; 

designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award 

conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires a physical 

signature on the award document by the authorized representative. The fully-executed award 

document must then be scanned and submitted to OJP. 

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements 

If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the OJPapproved application, the recipient must comply with all award conditions, as well as all 

applicable requirements of federal statutes and regulations (including applicable requirements 

referred to in the assurances and certifications executed in connection with award acceptance). 

OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information on post-award legal 

requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an application. 

Applicants should consult the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements – FY 2018 Awards”, available in the OJP Funding 

Resource Center at https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm. In addition, applicants should examine the 

following two legal documents, as each successful applicant must execute both documents 

before it may receive any award funds. (An applicant is not required to submit these documents 

as part of an application.) 

 Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements. 

 Certified Standard Assurances. 

The webpages accessible through the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to 

OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements – FY 2018 Awards” are intended to give applicants 

for OJP awards a general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that 

apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY 

2019. Individual OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those 

additional conditions may relate to the particular statute, program, or solicitation under which the 

award is made; to the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under 

other federal awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other 

pertinent considerations. 
39

NIJ-2019-15403 

Awards under this solicitation will include a condition (the specific terms of which will govern the 

award) related to verification of employment eligibility. The condition will, generally speaking, 

require the recipient (and any subrecipient) that accepts the award to verify the employment 

eligibility of any individual hired under the award, consonant with 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(1). 

Awards under this solicitation will include a condition (the specific terms of which will govern the 

award) related to competition requirements set forth at 2 C.F.R. § 200.319. The condition will, 

generally speaking, prohibit recipients (and any subrecipients) from procuring goods and 

services with award funds by means of any competition that disadvantages or excludes vendors 

on the basis of their having (or their having had) a prior or existing contractual relationship with 

the federal government. 

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements 

In addition to the deliverables and expected scholarly products described in Section A. Program 

Description, any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the 

following reports and data. 

Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual

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

accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Applicants 

should anticipate that progress reports will be required to follow the non-budgetary components 

of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) template/format. General information on 

RPPRs may be found at www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rppr/. Future awards and fund drawdowns 

may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, OJP may require additional 

reports.) 

Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific 

circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and 

administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP 

award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal 

government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the 

award condition posted on the OJP webpage at https://ojp.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm. 

Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, an award recipient under this 

solicitation also must provide data that measure the results of the work done under the award. 

To demonstrate program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ with fulfilling its 

responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public 

Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, OJP will require 

any award recipient, post award, to provide performance data listed as part of regular progress 

reporting. Successful applicants will be required to access OJP’s performance measurement 

page at www.ojp.gov/performance for an overview of performance measurement activities at 

OJP. 

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) 

For OJP contact(s), see the title page. 

For contact information for Grants.gov, see the title page. 
40

NIJ-2019-15403 

H. Other Information 

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

All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the 

federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold 

information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the 

responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one 

of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant 

to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application. 

In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in 

those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory 

exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and 

names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate 

circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicant/recipient that submitted a responsive 

document. 

For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a 

nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that 

involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicant/recipient that submitted the 

application and ask it to identify -- quite precisely -- any particular information in the application 

that the applicant/recipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it 

believes applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicant/recipient, OJP 

makes an independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a 

similar process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement 

sensitive information. 

Provide Feedback to OJP 

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

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

review process. Provide feedback to OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov. 

IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for feedback and suggestions only. OJP does not send replies from 

this mailbox to messages it receives in this mailbox. Any prospective applicant that has specific 

questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation must use the appropriate 

telephone number or e-mail listed on the front of this solicitation document to obtain information. 

These contacts are provided to help ensure that prospective applicants can directly reach an 

individual who can address specific questions in a timely manner. 

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

resume to ojpprsupport@usdoj.gov. (Do not send your resume to the OJP Solicitation Feedback 

email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization or entity can be a 

peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization/entity has submitted an 

application.
41

NIJ-2019-15403 

Application Checklist 

Evaluation of Project Safe Neighborhoods 

This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application. 

What an Applicant Should Do: 

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 32) 

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 32) 

To Register with Grants.gov: 

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 32) 

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 32) 

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 33) 

_____ Access Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 33) 

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 30) 

_____ Read Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov

_____ Read OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting 

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

(see page 15) 

After Application Submission, Receive Grants.gov Email Notifications That: 

_____ (1) application has been received 

_____ (2) application has either been successfully validated or rejected with errors 

(see page 33) 

If no Grants.gov receipt, and validation or error notifications are received: 

_____ Contact NIJ regarding experiencing technical difficulties (see page 2) 

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements: 

_____ Review the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and 

Cooperative Agreements - FY 2018 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center at 

https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm. 

Scope Requirement:

_____ The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s). 

Eligibility Requirement: See cover page. 

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 16) 

_____ Project Abstract (if applicable) (see page 16) 

_____ Program Narrative (critical element) (see page 17) 

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (critical element) (see page 21) 

_____ Budget Narrative (critical element) (see page 21) 

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 24) 

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 25) 

_____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (see page 25) 
42

NIJ-2019-15403

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 26)

_____ Additional Attachments

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 26)

_____ Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High Risk Grantees (if applicable)

(see page 28)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 28)

_____ Request and Justification for Employee Compensation; Waiver (if applicable)

(see page 14)