U.S. Department of Justice OMB No. 1121-0329

Office of Justice Programs Approval Expires 07/31/2016

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 for research on sentinel events in the criminal 

justice system. This program furthers the Department’s mission by sponsoring research to 

provide objective, independent knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime and justice, 

particularly at the State and local levels.

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal 

Justice System Errors

Eligibility

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

agreements with, States (including territories), units of local government (including federally 

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

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

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

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

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

to apply.

NIJ welcomes applications that involve two or more entities, however, one eligible entity must 

be the applicant and the other(s) must be proposed as subrecipient(s). The applicant must be 

the entity with primary responsibility for conducting and leading the project. If successful, the 

applicant will be responsible for monitoring and appropriately managing any subrecipients or, as 

applicable, for administering any procurement subcontracts that would receive federal program 

funds from the applicant under the award.

An eligible applicant may submit more than one application, as long as each application 

proposes a different project in response to the solicitation. (Applicants should also review and 

consider the “Duplicate Applications” note under How to Apply in Section D. Application and 

Submission Information.) Subrecipients may be part of multiple proposals.

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

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

For additional eligibility information, see Section C. Eligibility Information.

Deadline

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

due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 

11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 17, 2015.

All applicants are encouraged to read this Important Notice: Applying for Grants in 

Grants.gov.
NIJ-2015- 3995 2

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

Information.

Contact Information

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

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

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

federal holidays.

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

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

identified below within 24 hours after the application deadline and request approval to 

submit their application. Additional information on reporting technical issues is found under 

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

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact NIJSEI@usdoj.gov. 

General information on applying for NIJ awards can be found 

at www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/welcome.aspx. Answers to frequently asked questions that may 

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

Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: NIJ-2015-3995

Release date: January 13, 2015

SL001132
NIJ-2015- 3995 3

Contents

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

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

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

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products .........................................6

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

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

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

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

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement .........................................................................................9

Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals.................................................................................................9

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver.................................9

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...................10

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) ...................................................10

C. Eligibility Information ..............................................................................................................10

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

Limit on Number of Application Submissions ..........................................................................11

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

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

How to Apply ...........................................................................................................................21

E. Application Review Information ..............................................................................................24

Selection Criteria .....................................................................................................................24

Review Process.......................................................................................................................25

F. Federal Award Administration Information..............................................................................26

Federal Award Notices ............................................................................................................26

Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements..............................................26

General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements..............................27

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ....................................................................................29

H. Other Information ...................................................................................................................29

Provide Feedback to OJP .......................................................................................................29

Application Checklist ...............................................................................................................30
NIJ-2015- 3995 4

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal 

Justice System Errors

(CFDA No. 16.560)

A. Program Description

Overview

The purpose of the National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development 

Projects grants program (CFDA 16.560) is to encourage and support research, development, 

and evaluation to improve criminal justice policy and practice in the United States. NIJ is 

interested in stimulating research in a new area of study in criminal justice research – an 

exploration of the use of sentinel event reviews to improve justice systems overall. Mistakes, or 

negative outcomes, in the criminal justice system are rarely caused by one single act or actor. 

Often, mistakes signal multiple weaknesses in the criminal justice system or process. Thus, 

corrections to such errors need to go beyond traditional remedies that focus on removing the 

“bad apple” responsible for the event to those that address the underlying system level 

problems that contributed to the event. Sentinel event review processes have been used in 

other fields, notably aviation and medicine, and NIJ would like to explore whether similar 

reviews would be feasible in the criminal justice field.

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

(sections 201 and 202).

Program-Specific Information

When bad things happen in a complex system, the cause is rarely a single act, event, or slip-up. 

More often, bad outcomes like wrongful convictions, mistaken prison releases, and even 

revictimization are "sentinel events" – defined as significant negative outcomes that signal 

underlying weaknesses in the system or process. Sentinel events are likely the result of 

compound errors and, if properly analyzed and addressed, may provide important keys to 

strengthening the system and preventing future adverse events or outcomes. Even “near 

misses,” where tragic outcomes are eventually averted, can signal serious underlying 

weaknesses in the overall system. 

In September, 2014, NIJ released a special report, Mending Justice: Sentinel Event Reviews, 

that explores the potential for the criminal justice system to adopt an all stakeholder, nonblaming, forward-looking review process for examining errors 

(see www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247141.pdf). While the most common approach to dealing with 

errors is currently to seek out the “bad apples,” apportion blame, and assume the problem is 

fixed, there is a sense among the criminal justice practitioners and researchers who contributed 

to this report that the criminal justice system could benefit from taking a more “organizational 

accident” approach to dealing with errors. NIJ’s Sentinel Event Initiative seeks to build on this 

sense in several ways, including a current pilot in three jurisdictions, the first solicitation on this 

topic issued in FY 2014, and the current solicitation (see www.nij.gov/topics/justicesystem/Pages/sentinel-events.aspx).
NIJ-2015- 3995 5

The notion of sentinel events borrows extensively from medicine and aviation (and other 

industries) where a blame-placing, backward-looking review process is yielding to a more 

forward-thinking, non-blaming, problem-solving approach. As in these other fields, significant 

advances in criminal justice processes may be achieved through the combined efforts of 

researchers, system analysts, and the broad span of practitioners whose work is inextricably 

linked to the occurrence of error — and the eventual strengthening of the system and the 

prevention of future system errors. Further, sentinel events could refer to a wide range of 

“events” that occur within the system, from police misconduct, safety issues in jails and prisons, 

to financial fraud, just to name a few.

For this solicitation, NIJ invites research applications that add to our understanding of how the 

concept of sentinel events can be used to improve the functioning of justice systems. Funding 

under this solicitation will support multiple awards for either basic research or for applied studies 

(including evaluations). Though NIJ acknowledges that some projects involving field research 

may be more costly, NIJ anticipates that many relevant basic research projects could be 

supported at more modest funding levels.

This is an “open” solicitation, and all high-quality research proposals regarding some aspect of 

sentinel events pertaining to the criminal justice system will be considered under this funding 

opportunity. Researchers are encouraged to consider the following sentinel events research 

ideas or to propose their own research questions and designs:

• Learning from other industries: What lessons can be learned from other industries, 

such as aviation or medicine, that could guide implementation of an all-stakeholders, 

non-blaming, forward-looking approach in criminal justice settings? How well (or poorly) 

can experiences in other industries be expected to map onto criminal justice?

• Dealing with liability: What can we know about the risks of disclosure and liability that 

could result from a review of a sentinel event? What processes, safeguards, or 

protections have proven beneficial in managing disclosures of sensitive information for 

purposes of a non-blaming review process?

• Organizational change: What broader research work on organizational change will help 

inform the criminal justice system as it seeks to make system changes as a result of 

sentinel event reviews?

• Overcoming reviewer bias: What theories of social psychology, system change, and/or 

organizational psychology should guide the development of sentinel event review 

strategies among criminal justice actors? What techniques could be tested for 

overcoming commonly used heuristic approaches or deeply held biases that might 

prevent an otherwise successful examination of sentinel events?

• “Near-miss” events: What distinctive advantages – and challenges – would attend a 

review based on a “near miss” sentinel event (i.e., one in which the bad outcome nearly 

occurs but is averted)? What would we expect to be the potential for system change 

from such reviews where, despite errors along the way, the prevailing perception is “no 

harm, no foul: the system got it right?”

• Small-scale reviews: What lessons can be gleaned from criminal justice reviews that 

anticipate the sentinel events approach yet restrict the review of sentinel events to a 
NIJ-2015- 3995 6

single sector of the criminal justice system (e.g., only within the police department)? How 

can these more focused reviews be leveraged to undertake broader, more inclusive 

sentinel events reviews that incorporate a wider group of stakeholder-participants?

• Constructing a Sentinel Event (SE) report: Based on experiences in aviation and 

medicine, what are the essential parameters to a report from an all-stakeholders sentinel 

event review? How is timeliness balanced with a need for detail? How is authorship and 

review managed? Should some (or all) participants in a SE review process have “veto” 

authority over the final report? Can an effective SE report focus only on findings and 

refrain from stating explicit recommendations? What reporting strategies provide the 

greatest opportunity to influence policy? What follow-up mechanisms are necessary to 

ensure appropriate responses to findings and recommendations? How is explicit wrongdoing managed in a SE report? How well do the SE analysis and reporting strategies 

from medicine, aviation, and other industries transfer to a criminal justice context?

• The role of physical evidence in a SE review: How significant is physical evidence in 

reviewing sentinel events in aviation, hospital management, or other industries? What 

role will physical evidence play in ensuring a successful review of a criminal justice 

sentinel event? What obstacles must be overcome to safeguard against an overreliance 

on physical evidence?

• Persistent sentinel events: Some sentinel events are singular occurrences (e.g., a 

wrongful conviction). However, others are persistent, repetitious events that, while 

perhaps less dramatic, nevertheless may signal serious weaknesses in the system —

weaknesses to which the system too often becomes inured until a cataclysm occurs. 

(Examples include things like frequent injurious police-citizen encounters, repeated jail 

or prison security violations, or large numbers of unexpected and costly court case 

continuations. They also include repeated “near miss” events, where a bad outcome is 

avoided yet system weaknesses go unexamined and unaddressed.) How should these 

persistent sentinel events be approached? What is the cost-benefit calculation for 

ignoring these persistent problems? How might learning strategies and event review 

processes differ for a series of persistent sentinel events like these?

These research questions are only suggestive; applicants are encouraged to develop 

compelling research questions and rigorous research strategies that will provide the best 

investment opportunities for advancing our understanding of how to develop, guide, and 

complete an ambitious, all-stakeholders, non-blaming, forward-looking sentinel events approach 

in criminal justice.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

The goals of the Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal Justice System Errors solicitation 

are to engage in a new area of research in the criminal justice field and improve the knowledge 

and understanding of criminal justice-related issues through science. NIJ strives to provide 

objective and independent knowledge and validated tools to reduce violence on both a State 

and local level, and promote healing and justice for victims of all types of crimes. The objectives 

of this solicitation are to fund high-quality research projects in the field of criminal justice.
NIJ-2015- 3995 7

In addition to required data sets, a draft and final summary overview of research results, interim 

and final progress and financial reports,1 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.

Evaluation Research

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

research), the application is expected to propose the use of random selection and assignment 

of participants to experimental and control conditions, if feasible. Applications that include 

evaluation research but do not propose the use of randomization should explain clearly why 

randomization is not feasible, and should propose a strong quasi-experimental design that can 

address the risk of selection bias.

Also, applications that include evaluation research are expected to seriously consider 

incorporation of cost/benefit analysis. NIJ views cost/benefit analysis as an effective way to 

communicate and disseminate findings from evaluation research and best serve our criminal 

justice constituents.

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

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

Requirements for OJP Applications” at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm.

B. Federal Award Information

NIJ anticipates that up to a total of $1 million may become available for awards under this 

solicitation. Prospective applicants may propose projects with budgets as low as $10,000. From 

the total amount, NIJ anticipates that it will make multiple awards for up to 36-month project 

periods.

To allow time for, among other things, any necessary post-award review, modification, and 

clearance by OJP of the proposed budget, applicants should propose an award start date of 

January 1, 2016. 

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 set out each phase. (This is particularly the case if the applicant 

proposes a project that will exceed – in cost or length of project period – the amount or length 

anticipated for an individual award (or awards) under this solicitation.) Given limitations on the 

availability to NIJ of funds for research, development, and evaluation awards, this information 

will assist NIJ in considering whether partial funding of proposals that would not receive full 

funding would be productive. (If NIJ elects to fund only certain phases of a proposed project in 

FY 2015, the expected scholarly products from the partial-funding award may, in some cases, 

vary from those described above.)

 1 See “Federal Award Administration Information” (“General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting 

Requirements”) section of this solicitation, below, for additional information.
NIJ-2015- 3995 8

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

research, development, and evaluation solicitations. Important considerations in decisions 

regarding supplemental funding include, among other factors, the availability of funding, 

strategic priorities, NIJ’s assessment of the quality of the management of the award (for 

example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and NIJ’s assessment of 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 Award2

NIJ expects that it will make any award from this solicitation in the form of a grant.

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

Department of Justice regulations on confidentiality and human subjects’ protection. See 

“Evidence, Research, and Evaluation Guidance and Requirements” under “Solicitation 

Requirements” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

If selected for funding, the award recipient must:

a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides 

reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity 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.

c) Evaluate and monitor the non-federal entity's compliance with statute, 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 non-federal entity considers sensitive consistent with applicable federal, 

State and local laws regarding privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

 2 See generally 31 U.S.C. §§ 6301-6305 (defines and describes various forms of federal assistance relationships, 

including grants and cooperative agreements (a type of grant)). 
NIJ-2015- 3995 9

In order to better understand administrative requirements and cost principles, award applicants 

are encouraged to enroll, at no charge, in the Department of Justice Grants Financial 

Management Online Training available here.

Budget Information

What will not be funded:

• Proposals 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.)

• Proposals that are not responsive to this specific solicitation.

• Programs or services (including training) not directly in furtherance of the 

research/evaluation project.

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

See “Cofunding” paragraph under item 4 (“Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative”) 

under What an Application Should Include in Section D. Application and Submission 

Information. 

Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals

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

prior written approval of OJP for all such costs. If approved, pre-agreement costs could be paid 

from grant funds consistent with a grantee’s approved budget, and under applicable cost 

standards. However, all such costs prior to award and prior to approval of the costs are incurred 

at the sole risk of an applicant. Generally, no applicant should incur project costs before

submitting an application requesting federal funding for those costs. Should there be 

extenuating circumstances that appear to be appropriate for OJP’s consideration as preagreement costs, the applicant should contact the point of contact listed on the title page of this 

announcement for details on the requirements for submitting a written request for approval. See 

the section on Costs Requiring Prior Approval in the Financial Guide, 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, recipients may 

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

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

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

agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.3 The 2015 salary 

table for SES employees is available at www.opm.gov/pay-leave. Note: A recipient may 

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

limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Any such additional compensation will not be 

considered matching funds where match requirements apply.)

 3 This limitation on use of award funds does not apply to the non-profit organizations specifically named at Appendix 

VIII to 2 C.F.R. Part 200.
NIJ-2015- 3995 10

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

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

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

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

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

budget.

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

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

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

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

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

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

OJP strongly encourages applicants that propose to use award funds for any conference-, 

meeting-, or training-related activity to review carefully – before submitting an application – the 

OJP policy and guidance on “conference” approval, planning, and reporting available 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/confcost.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 such costs for cooperative agreement recipients and of some such 

costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, including 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 “Solicitation 

Requirements” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

C. Eligibility Information

Eligibility

For additional eligibility information, see Title page.

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

For additional information on cost sharing and match requirement, see Section B. Federal 

Award Information.
NIJ-2015- 3995 11

Limit on Number of Application Submissions

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

recent system-validated version submitted. For more information on system-validated versions, 

see How to Apply.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

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

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

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

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

conditions.

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications determined to be nonresponsive to the 

scope of the solicitation, or that do not include the application elements that NIJ has designated 

to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. Under this 

solicitation, NIJ has designated the following application elements as critical: Program Narrative, 

Budget Detail Worksheet, 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. Please review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How to 

Apply to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats.

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

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

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

applicants include resumes in a single file.

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

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

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

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

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

Intergovernmental Review: This funding opportunity (program) is not subject to Executive 

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

response to question 19 to indicate that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.”)

2. Project Abstract

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

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

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

project abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe the project. 
NIJ-2015- 3995 12

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

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

• Written for a general public audience.

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

• Single-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman) with 1-inch margins.

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

program narrative.

Project abstracts should follow the detailed template (including the detailed instructions as to 

content) available at www.nij.gov/funding/documents/nij-project-abstract-template.pdf.

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

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

opportunity to share information with the public regarding promising but unfunded 

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

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

proposals. 

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

permission to share their project abstract (including contact information) with the public if NIJ 

does not fund the proposed project. Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not 

affect OJP’s funding decisions, and, if the application is not funded, granting permission will 

not guarantee that project abstract information will be shared, nor will it guarantee funding 

from any other source.

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

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

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

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 30 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.4

 4 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 
NIJ-2015- 3995 13

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 

organization and the principal investigator.

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

narrative limit).

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

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

more than two pages, addressing: (1) the title, submission date, NIJ-assigned 

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

to the proposal, including responses to previous feedback received from NIJ.

c. Table of Contents and Figures (not counted against the 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.

• Project Design and Implementation.

• Potential Impact.

• Capabilities/Competencies.

Within these sections, the narrative should address:

• Purpose, goals, and objectives.

• Review of relevant literature.

• Detailed description of research design and methods, such as research 

questions, hypotheses, description of sample, and analysis plan.

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

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

Information,” above.
NIJ-2015- 3995 14

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

Expected Scholarly Products under Program-Specific Information, above, 

for a discussion of expected scholarly products.

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

• Management plan and organization.

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

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

to make available to broader interested audiences – such as 

criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers – summary 

information from the planned scholarly products of the proposed project 

(such as summaries of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals), in a 

form designed to be readily accessible and useful to those audiences. 

(Such dissemination might include, for example, trade press articles and 

webinars.)

e. Appendices (not counted against the 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 resumes of the principal investigator and any and all coprincipal investigators. In addition, curriculum vitae, resumes, or biographical 

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

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

example, individuals such as statisticians serving as consultants to conduct

proposed data analysis).

• List (to the extent known) of all proposed project staff members, including 

those affiliated with the applicant organization or any proposed subrecipient

organization(s), any proposed consultant(s) and contractors (whether 

individuals or organizations), and any proposed members of an advisory 

board for the project (if applicable). The list should include, for each individual 

and organization: name, title (if applicable), employer or other organizational

affiliation, and roles and responsibilities proposed for the project. Applicants 

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

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

this listing.

• 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.
NIJ-2015- 3995 15

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go 

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

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

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

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

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

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

above, for definition of “scholarly products.”)

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and 

correctional agencies (if applicable).

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

proposal has been submitted (if applicable).

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

special award conditions, including a partial withholding of award funds) that 

data sets resulting in whole or in part from projects funded under this 

solicitation be submitted for archiving with the National Archive of Criminal 

Justice Data (NACJD) (See www.nij.gov/funding/data-resourcesprogram/applying/Pages/data-archiving-strategies.aspx).

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

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

should provide brief details about proposed data management and archiving,

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

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

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

secondary analysis. Pertinent files and documentation include, among other 

things, qualitative and quantitative data produced, instrumentation and data 

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

to reproduce all constructed measures and the original data analysis,

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

copy of the privacy certificate and informed consent protocols. 

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

associated with meeting archiving requirements.

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

the project period.

4. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. Applicants that 
NIJ-2015- 3995 16

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

the sample budget worksheet. (Work associated with satisfying data archiving 

requirements should be reflected.) NIJ expects applicants to provide a thorough 

narrative to each section of the Budget Detail Worksheet.

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

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

b. Budget Narrative

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

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

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

activities).

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

effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost 

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

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

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

used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.

The narrative should be sound mathematically, and correspond with the information and 

figures provided in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how the 

applicant estimated and calculated all costs, and how they are relevant to the completion 

of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes but 

need not be in a spreadsheet format. As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget 

Narrative should be broken down by year.

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 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. Non-Competitive Procurement Contracts In Excess of Simplified Acquisition 

Threshold

If an applicant proposes to make one or more non-competitive procurements of products 

or services, where the non-competitive procurement will exceed the simplified 

acquisition threshold (also known as the small purchase threshold), which is currently 
NIJ-2015- 3995 17

set at $150,000, the application should address the considerations outlined in 

the Financial Guide.

e. Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals

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

Information.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

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

applicant’s accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost categories.

For the definition of Cognizant Federal Agency, see the “Glossary of Terms” in the Financial 

Guide. For assistance with identifying your cognizant agency, please contact the Customer 

Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal 

agency, applicants may obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf.

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

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

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

or other documentation, as appropriate, that certifies that the applicant has the legal 

authority from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed project on tribal lands. In those 

instances when an organization or consortium of tribes applies for a grant on behalf of a 

tribe or multiple specific tribes, the application should include appropriate legal 

documentation, as described above, from all tribes that would receive services or assistance 

under the grant. A consortium of tribes for which existing consortium bylaws allow action 

without support from all tribes in the consortium (i.e., without an authorizing resolution or 

comparable legal documentation from each tribal governing body) may submit, instead, a 

copy of its consortium bylaws with the application.

7. Applicant Disclosure of High Risk Status

Applicants are to disclose whether they are currently designated high risk by another federal 

grant making agency. This includes any status requiring additional oversight by the federal 

agency due to past programmatic or financial concerns. If an applicant is designated high

risk by another federal grant making agency, you must email the following information 

to OJPComplianceReporting@usdoj.gov at the time of application submission:

• The federal agency that currently designated the applicant as high risk;

• Date the applicant was designated high risk;

• The high risk point of contact name, phone number, and email address, from that 

federal agency; and
NIJ-2015- 3995 18

SAMPLE

• Reasons for the high risk status.

OJP seeks this information to ensure appropriate federal oversight of any grant award. 

Unlike the Excluded Parties List, this high risk information does not disqualify any 

organization from receiving an OJP award. However, additional grant oversight may be 

included, if necessary, in award documentation.

8. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant disclosure of pending applications5

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

grants or subgrants (including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding 

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

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

under this solicitation. The disclosure should include both direct applications for federal 

funding (e.g., applications to federal agencies) and indirect applications for such funding 

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

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

Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement 

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

duplication.

Applicants that have pending applications as described above are to provide the 

following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 months:

• The federal or State funding agency.

• The solicitation name/project name.

• The point of contact information at the applicable funding agency.

 5 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.

Federal or 

State 

Funding 

Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

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

Funding Agency

DOJ/COPS COPS Hiring 

Program

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

HHS/ 

Substance 

Abuse & 

Mental Health 

Services 

Administration

Drug Free 

Communities 

Mentoring Program/

North County Youth 

Mentoring Program

John Doe, 202/000-0000; john.doe@hhs.gov
NIJ-2015- 3995 19

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

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

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

separate attachment page (e.g., “[Applicant Name on SF-424] does not have pending 

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

(including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding to support the same 

project being proposed under this solicitation and will cover the identical cost items 

outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the application under this solicitation.”).

b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

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

merits, in order to receive funds, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation 

independence, including appropriate safeguards to ensure research/evaluation 

objectivity and integrity, both in this proposal and as it may relate to the applicant’s other 

current or prior related projects. This documentation may be included as an attachment 

to the application which addresses BOTH i. and ii. below.

i. For purposes of this solicitation, applicants must document research and evaluation 

independence and integrity by including, at a minimum, one of the following two 

items:

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

any research integrity issues (including all principal investigators and subrecipients) and it has concluded that the design, conduct, or reporting of 

research and evaluation funded by NIJ grants, cooperative agreements, or 

contracts will not be biased by any personal or financial conflict of interest on 

the part of part of its staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients responsible for 

the research and evaluation or on the part of the applicant organization;

OR

b. A specific listing of actual or perceived conflicts of interest that the applicant 

has identified in relation to this proposal. These conflicts could be either 

personal (related to specific staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients) or 

organizational (related to the applicant or any subgrantee organization). 

Examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations may 

include, but are not limited to, 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 could not be 

given a grant 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), as the 

organization in such an instance would appear to be evaluating the 

effectiveness of its own prior work. The key is whether a reasonable person 

understanding all of the facts would be able to have confidence that the 

results of any research or evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any 

outside personal or financial interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and 
NIJ-2015- 3995 20

reliability of an evaluation or research product is a problem and must be 

disclosed.

ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation applicants must address the issue of 

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 potential personal or 

organizational conflicts of interest exist, then the applicant should provide a 

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

Applicants MUST also include an explanation of the specific processes and 

procedures that the applicant will put in place to identify and eliminate (or, at 

the very least, mitigate) potential personal or financial conflicts of interest on 

the part of its staff, consultants, and/or sub-recipients for this particular 

project, should that be necessary during the grant period. Documentation that 

may be helpful in this regard could include organizational codes of 

ethics/conduct or policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial 

conflicts of interest.

OR

b. If the applicant has identified specific personal or organizational conflicts of 

interest in its proposal during this review, the applicant must propose a 

specific and robust mitigation plan to address conflicts noted above. At a 

minimum, the plan must include specific processes and procedures that the 

applicant will put in place to eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) potential 

personal or financial conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, 

and/or sub-recipients for this particular project, should that be necessary 

during the grant period. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard 

could include organizational codes of ethics/conduct or policies regarding 

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

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

Considerations in assessing research and evaluation independence and integrity will 

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

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

organization in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation activity; and the 

adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed remedies to control any such factors.

9. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire

In accordance with 2 CFR 200.205, Federal agencies must have in place a framework for 

evaluating the risks posed by applicants before they receive a Federal award. To facilitate 

part of this risk evaluation, all applicants (other than an individual) are to download, 

complete, and submit this form.

10. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

All applicants must complete this information. Applicants that expend any funds for lobbying 

activities are to provide the detailed information requested on the form Disclosure of 

Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). Applicants that do not expend any funds for lobbying activities 
NIJ-2015- 3995 21

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

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

How to Apply

Applicants must register in, and submit applications through Grants.gov, a “one-stop storefront” 

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

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

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

4726 or 606–545–5035, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except federal holidays. Registering 

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

take several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. OJP 

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

In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications 72 hours prior to the application due 

date to allow time to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and 

to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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

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

Grants.gov for updates will be automatically notified.

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

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

in the table below. Grants.gov is designed to reject any application that includes an 

attachment(s) with a file name that contains any characters not shown in the table below. 

Grants.gov is designed to forward successfully submitted applications to OJP’s Grants 

Management System (GMS).

Characters Special Characters

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

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

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

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

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

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

format.

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

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

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

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

the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps:

OJP may not make a federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all 

applicable DUNS and SAM requirements. If an applicant has not fully complied with the 

requirements by the time the federal awarding agency is ready to make a federal award, the 
NIJ-2015- 3995 22

federal awarding agency may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a federal 

award and use that determination as a basis for making a federal award to another applicant.

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

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

funds include a DUNS number in their applications for a new award or a supplement to an 

existing award. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the 

universal standard for identifying and differentiating entities receiving federal funds. The 

identifier is used for tracking purposes and to validate address and point of contact 

information for federal assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. The DUNS 

number will be used throughout the grant life cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, 

one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a DUNS number or 

apply online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 1-2 business days.

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

repository for standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, 

and subrecipients. OJP requires all applicants (other than individuals) for federal financial 

assistance to maintain current registrations in the SAM database. Applicants must be 

registered in SAM to successfully register in Grants.gov. Applicants must update or renew 

their SAM registration annually to maintain an active status.

Applications cannot be successfully submitted in Grants.gov until Grants.gov receives the 

SAM registration information. The information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take up 

to 48 hours. OJP recommends that the applicant register or renew registration with SAM as 

early as possible.

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

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

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

and password. The applicant organization’s DUNS number must be used to complete this 

step. For more information about the registration process, go 

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

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

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

applicant organization’s AOR. Note that an organization can have more than one AOR.

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

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

Federal Domestic Assistance number for this solicitation is 16.560, titled “National Institute 

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

opportunity number is NIJ-2015- 3995.

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

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

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

application and the second will state whether the application has been successfully

validated, or 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 well ahead of the deadline provides time to correct the 
NIJ-2015- 3995 23

problem(s) that caused the rejection. Important: OJP urges applicants to submit 

applications 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. 

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

timeframes.

Note: Duplicate Applications

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

recent system-validated version submitted. See Note on File Names and File Types under How 

To Apply.

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

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

prevent them from submitting their application by the deadline must contact the Grants.gov 

Customer Support Hotline or the SAM Help Desk to report the technical issue and receive a 

tracking number. Then applicant must e-mail the NIJ contact identified in the Contact 

Information section on page 2 within 24 hours after the application deadline and request 

approval to submit their application. The e-mail must describe the technical difficulties, and 

include a timeline of the applicant’s submission efforts, the complete grant application, the 

applicant’s DUNS number, and any Grants.gov Help Desk or SAM tracking number(s). Note: 

NIJ does not automatically approve requests. After the program office reviews the 

submission, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to validate the reported technical 

issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late application has been 

approved or denied. If OJP determines that the applicant failed to follow all required procedures, 

which resulted in an untimely application submission, OJP will deny the applicant’s request to 

submit their application. 

The following conditions are generally insufficient to justify late submissions:

• Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time.

• 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, 

including firewalls.

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

the top of the OJP funding Web page 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/Explore/CurrentFundingOpportunities.htm.
NIJ-2015- 3995 24

E. Application Review Information

Selection Criteria

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

the following review criteria.

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

1. Demonstrated understanding of the problem.

2. 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.

Potential Impact – 20% 

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 proposal).

2. Demonstrated ability of the applicant organization to manage the effort.

3. Relationship between the capabilities/competencies of the proposed project staff 

(including the applicant organization) and the scope of the proposed project.
NIJ-2015- 3995 25

Budget

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. Proposed budget alignment with proposed project activities.

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.

Review Process

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for awarding grants. NIJ reviews the 

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

measurable, and achievable, as well as consistent with the solicitation.

Peer reviewers will review the applications submitted under this solicitation that meet basic 

minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether applicants have met basic minimum 

requirements, OJP screens applications for compliance with specified program requirements to 

help determine which applications should proceed to further consideration for award. Although 

program requirements may vary, the following are common requirements applicable to all 

solicitations for funding under OJP grant programs:

• Applications must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant.

• Applications must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if 

applicable).

• Applications must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation.

• Applications must include all items designated as “critical elements.”

• Applicants will be checked against the General Services Administration’s Excluded 

Parties List.

For a list of critical elements, see “What an Application Should Include” under Section D. 

Application and Submission Information.
NIJ-2015- 3995 26

NIJ may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, to assess 

applications meeting basic minimum requirements on technical merit using the solicitation’s 

selection criteria. An external peer reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given 

solicitation who is not a current DOJ employee. An internal reviewer is a current DOJ employee 

who is well-versed or has expertise in the subject matter of this solicitation. A peer review panel

will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum requirements. 

OJP reviews applications for potential discretionary awards to evaluate the risks posed by 

applicants before they receive an award. This review may include but is not limited to the 

following:

1. Financial stability and fiscal integrity

2. Quality of management systems and ability to meet the management standards 

prescribed in the Financial Guide

3. History of performance

4. Reports and findings from audits

5. The applicant's ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other 

requirements imposed on non-Federal entities

6. Proposed costs to determine if the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative 

accurately explain project costs, and whether those costs are reasonable, necessary, 

and allowable under applicable federal cost principles and agency regulations

All final award decisions will be made by the Director of the National Institute of Justice. Peer 

reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are advisory only, although their views 

are considered carefully. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations for award 

recommendations and decisions may include, but are not limited to, planned scholarly products, 

proposed budgets, past performance (including scholarly products) under prior NIJ and OJP 

awards, research independence and integrity, strategic priorities, and available funding when 

making awards.

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

OJP award notification will be sent from GMS. Recipients will be required to login; accept any 

outstanding assurances and certifications on the award; designate a financial point of contact; 

and review, sign, and accept the award. The award acceptance process involves physical 

signature of the award document by the authorized representative and the scanning of the fullyexecuted award document to OJP.

Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements

If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the 

agency-approved project proposal and budget, the recipient must comply with award terms and 

conditions, and other legal requirements, that are included in the award, incorporated into the 
NIJ-2015- 3995 27

award by reference, or are otherwise applicable to the award. OJP strongly encourages 

prospective applicants to review the information pertaining to these requirements prior to 

submitting an application. To assist applicants and recipients in accessing and reviewing this 

information, OJP has placed it on its Solicitation Requirements page of the OJP Funding 

Resource Center.

Please note in particular the following two forms, which applicants must submit in GMS prior to 

the receipt of any award funds, as each details legal requirements with which applicants must 

provide specific assurances and certifications of compliance. Applicants may view these forms

in the OJP Funding Resource Center and are strongly encouraged to review and consider them 

carefully prior to making an application for OJP grant funds.

• Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements

• Standard Assurances

Upon grant approval, OJP electronically transmits (via GMS) the award document to the 

prospective award recipient. In addition to other award information, the award document 

contains award terms and conditions that specify national policy requirements6 with which 

recipients of federal funding must comply; uniform administrative requirements, cost principles, 

and audit requirements; and program-specific terms and conditions required based on 

applicable program (statutory) authority or requirements set forth in OJP solicitations and 

program announcements. For example, certain efforts may call for special requirements, terms, 

or conditions relating to intellectual property, data/information-sharing or -access, or information 

security; or audit requirements, expenditures and milestones, or publications and/or press 

releases.

OJP also may place additional terms and conditions on an award based on its risk assessment 

of the applicant, or for other reasons it determines necessary to fulfill the goals and objectives of 

the program. 

Prospective applicants may access and review the text of mandatory conditions OJP includes in 

all OJP awards, as well as the text of certain other conditions, such as administrative conditions, 

via OJP’s Mandatory Award Terms and Conditions page of the Funding Resource Center.

General Information About Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

Recipients must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual progress reports, final financial 

and progress reports, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in accordance with 2 CFR Part 

200. Applicants should anticipate that progress reports will be required to follow the nonbudgetary 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.

 6 See generally 2 C.F.R. 200.300 (provides a general description of national policy requirements typically applicable 

to recipients of Federal awards, including the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 

(FFATA)).
NIJ-2015- 3995 28

Special Reporting requirements may be required by OJP depending on the statutory, legislative 

or administrative requirements of the recipient or the program.

As indicated earlier in this solicitation, NIJ expects scholarly products to result from any award 

under this solicitation. Please review the Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected 

Scholarly Products segment of the “Program-Specific Information” section of this solicitation, as 

well as the “Performance Measures” section.

In addition to the expectation of scholarly products, successful applicants under this solicitation 

will be required to submit the following deliverables regarding the work funded by the NIJ award.

Draft and Final Summary Overview of the Work Conducted under the Award

The overview is expected to provide an overall summary of the work under, and results of, the 

project funded by NIJ under this solicitation. Among other things, the summary overview should 

address the purpose of the project, project subjects (if applicable), project design and methods, 

data analysis, project findings, and implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the 

United States.

A draft summary overview no longer than 10 pages long (double-spaced) is to be submitted 90 

days prior to the end of the project period for NIJ review and comment.

Required Data Sets and Associated Files and Documentation

As discussed earlier, NIJ requires recipients of an award under this solicitation to submit to 

NACJD all data sets that result in whole or in part from the work funded by NIJ, along with 

associated files and any 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. All data sets and necessary documentation are to be submitted 90 days 

prior to the end of the project period. For more information, see the “Program Narrative” section 

of What an Application Should Include.

Performance Measures

To assist the Department with fulfilling its responsibilities under the Government Performance 

and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, 

Public Law 111–352, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation must provide data 

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

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

that OJP can calculate values for the “Performance Measures” column. (Submission of 

performance measures data is not required for the application.) Performance measures for this 

solicitation are as follows:
NIJ-2015- 3995 29

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee 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 

proposal or any subsequent agency-approved 

modifications to the scope.

2. Quality of the research as demonstrated by 

the scholarly products that result in whole or in 

part from work funded under the NIJ award 

(published, peer-reviewed, scientific journal 

articles, and/or (as appropriate for the funded 

project) law review journal articles, book 

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

technological prototypes, patented inventions, 

or similar scientific products).

3. Quality of management as measured by such 

factors as whether significant project 

milestones were achieved, reporting and other 

deadlines were met, and costs remained 

within approved limits.

1. Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual 

and final progress 

reports, and a draft and 

final summary overview 

of the work performed 

under the NIJ award.

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.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

For additional Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s), see the Title page.

For additional contact information for Grants.gov, see the Title page. 

H. Other Information

Provide Feedback to OJP

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

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

review/peer review process. Provide feedback to OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov.

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

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

you must directly contact the appropriate number or e-mail listed on the front of this solicitation 

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

who can address your specific questions in a timely manner.

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

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

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

reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization have submitted an application.
NIJ-2015- 3995 30

Application Checklist

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal Justice System Errors

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

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 21)

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 22)

To Register with Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 22)

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 22)

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 22)

_____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 22)

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 21)

_____ Read Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov

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 22)

If no Grants.gov receipt, and validation or error notifications are received:

_____ Contact NIJ regarding experiencing technical difficulties (see page 23)

General Requirements:

_____ Review the Solicitation Requirements in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 11)

_____ Project Abstract (see page 11)

_____ Program Narrative (see page 12)

_____ Appendices (see page 14)

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 15)

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 16)

_____ Employee Compensation Waiver request and justification (if applicable) 

(see page 9)

_____ Read OJP policy and guidance on “conference” approval, planning, and reporting

available 

at www.ojp.gov/financialguide/PostawardRequirements/chapter15page1.htm (

see page 10)

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 20)

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 17)

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 17)

_____ Applicant Disclosure of High Risk Status (see page 17)

_____ Additional Attachments 

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 18)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 19)
NIJ-2015- 3995 31

_____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (if applicable)

(see page 20)