Notices regarding the solicitation “Research and Evaluation of 

Promising Reentry Initiatives, Fiscal Year 2020”

March 27, 2020: Many of our solicitations encourage research partnerships and require 

applicants to include a strong letter of support, signed by an appropriate decision-making 

authority from each proposed partnering entity.

NIJ continues to strongly encourage prospective applicants to submit executed agreements 

necessary to carrying out the work proposed with applications if they can be obtained, but with 

an understanding of the circumstances surrounding the pandemic, NIJ will accept applications 

without them.

Applicants selected for award will be required to submit completed agreements by January 1, 

2021. Funds will be withheld until such agreements have been received.

March 26, 2020: A solicitation FAQ has been added here: 

https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/opportunities/nij-2020-17295. Any additional FAQs related to this 

solicitation will be added to this page as they become available.

March 4, 2020: On February 21, 2020, NIJ hosted a webinar that provided an overview and 

discussion of the program. The slides and transcript from this webinar have been added to the 

end of this document.

February 3, 2020: NIJ will host a webinar to discuss this solicitation on February 21, 2020 from 

1:00 – 2:00 pm ET. Register for the webinar.

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 

Research and Evaluation of Promising Reentry Initiatives, Fiscal Year 

2020

FY 2020 Competitive Research Grant Solicitation 

CFDA No. 16.560

Grants.gov Solicitation Number: NIJ-2020-17295

Solicitation Release Date: January 23, 2020 

Application Deadline: 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 5, 2020

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

Justice (NIJ) is seeking applications for funding for rigorous examination of innovative reentry 

initiatives, including those in rural communities. This program furthers the Department’s mission 

by advancing the body of knowledge on promising practices in the field of offender reentry, to 

inform the development of more effective reentry-specific initiatives, at the federal, local, tribal, 

and community levels. 

This solicitation incorporates the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide by reference. The OJP 

Grant Application Resource Guide provides guidance to applicants on how to prepare and 

submit applications for funding to OJP. If this solicitation expressly modifies any provision in the 

OJP Grant Application Resource Guide, the applicant is to follow the guidelines in this 

solicitation as to that provision. 

Eligibility (Who may apply) 

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

agreements with eligible entities as listed below: 

 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); and
2

NIJ-2020-17295

 Institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education).

Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and foreign colleges and universities are not 

eligible to apply. Federal agencies are eligible to apply. (Any award made to a federal agency 

will be made as an inter-agency reimbursable agreement.)

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

management fee.

NIJ will consider 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). The applicant must be the entity that would have primary 

responsibility for carrying out the award, including administering the funding and managing the 

entire project. For additional information on subawards, see the OJP Grant Application 

Resource Guide.

Contact Information

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

Support Hotline at 1-800-518-4726 or 1-606-545-5035 (international), at 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html, or at 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 must email the NIJ contact identified 

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

application after the deadline. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears 

under “Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues” in the “How To Apply

(Grants.gov)” section in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

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 https://nij.ojp.gov/funding. Answers to frequently asked questions that 

may assist applicants are posted at https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/frequently-asked-questions-aboutapplying-grants-and-cooperative-agreements.

Deadline Details

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 5, 

2020.

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 
3

NIJ-2020-17295

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

problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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 

adding an attachment, select the View Attachment button to confirm you attached the correct 

file. To remove the file, select the Delete Attachment button.

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

For additional information, see the “How to Apply (Grants.gov)” section in the OJP Grant 

Application Resource Guide.
4

NIJ-2020-17295

Contents

A. Program Description 5

Overview 5

Project-Specific Information 5

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products 9

OJP Priority Areas 11

B. Federal Award Information 12

Type of Award 13

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls 13

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. 14

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable). 14

C. Eligibility Information 14

D. Application and Submission Information 14

What an Application Should Include 14

How To Apply (Grants.gov) 20

E. Application Review Information 21

Review Criteria 21

Review Process 22

F. Federal Award Administration Information 24

Federal Award Notices 24

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements 24

Information Technology (IT) Security Clauses 24

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements 24

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) 24

H. Other Information 25

Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a). 25

Provide Feedback to OJP. 25

Application Checklist 26
5

NIJ-2020-17295

Research and Evaluation of Promising Reentry 

Initiatives, Fiscal Year 2020

CFDA No. 16.560

A. Program Description

Overview

With this solicitation, NIJ requests proposals for rigorous research to examine reentry initiatives 

that incorporate promising practices, strategies, or programs. NIJ is interested in supporting 

evaluations of innovative reentry initiatives that focus on offenders with a moderate-to-high-risk 

of reoffending. This solicitation supports DOJ Strategic Objective 3.1: Combat violent crime, 

promote safe communities, and uphold the rights of victims of crime.

The primary goal of this solicitation is to support the rigorous examination of innovative reentry 

initiatives, including those in rural communities. NIJ is particularly interested in proposals 

addressing reentry initiatives (either a program or plan) that begin in institutional settings and 

continue through release. NIJ will give preference in award decisions to proposals for 

evaluations of an innovative reentry initiative, across multiple sites, using randomized controlled 

trials (RCTs).

Statutory Authority: Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 

(sections 201 and 202); Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2019 (Public Law 116-93).

Project-Specific Information

Offender reentry initiatives provide a variety of services, skills training, and/or therapeutic 

interventions designed to promote prosocial behavior, reductions in recidivism, and the 

offenders’ successful reintegration into the community from jail or prison. Given the potential 

public safety and fiscal implications of an offender’s successful reentry into society, it is critical 

for correctional stakeholders to know which reentry initiatives are the most efficacious. This 

solicitation is intended to support research to provide knowledge on best practices to support 

successful offender reentry, building on prior research funded in part by NIJ.

NIJ is particularly interested in reentry initiatives that began in institutional settings — jails or 

prisons — and continue after release. NIJ seeks evidence of how best to provide continuity of 

programming, both in the institution and in the community, that addresses offenders’ 

criminogenic risks and needs.

Applicants may propose an evaluation of:

 A specific reentry program delivered to incarcerated offenders and continued upon 

release; or

 An integrated reentry plan involving multiple programs delivered in a correctional facility 

and in the community, post-release, to the same offenders.
6

NIJ-2020-17295

Proposals should include process, outcome/impact, and cost studies. Successful applicants will 

examine outcomes related to reductions in recidivism1 and delinquency or criminal behavior, 

and related reentry outcomes (e.g., housing stability, employment, demonstrating academic 

engagement, and/or participation in structured activities). For an initiative to be considered for 

evaluation under this solicitation, one of its overall goals must be recidivism reduction.

Applicants should provide a compelling justification that the reentry initiative is suitable for 

evaluation, and that the practices, strategies, or programs associated with it are promising. 

Evidence supporting the selected reentry strategy, practice, or program should meet at least 

one of the following criteria:

 Rated as “Promising” or “Effective” on Crimesolutions.gov, NIJ’s web-based 

clearinghouse of programs and practices;

 Cited in the empirical literature on offender reentry;

 Funded by a federal agency, including, but not limited to, the Bureau of Justice 

Assistance (BJA) and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

(OJJDP); or

 Implemented abroad and logically applied to U.S. offender populations.

NIJ will consider single- and multi-site evaluations of reentry interventions, with a preference for 

the latter. In both instances, a large enough sample that provides sufficient statistical power to 

detect true differences between the treatment and control groups, and the generation of 

generalizable knowledge about offender reentry, are imperative. If a multi-site evaluation is 

proposed, applicants should submit research designs that include both site-specific and pooled 

outcome analyses. Applicants should also account for any program deviations in the outcome 

analysis. All applicants should document, via letters of support or Memoranda of Understanding

(MOU), that they have established a collaborative relationship with the participating site(s) and 

all relevant agencies, to facilitate the acquisition of data required to support the proposed 

research or evaluation effort.

Preference in award decisions will be given to research proposals that seek to evaluate a 

reentry initiative in multiple sites using an RCT design. The RCT will incorporate random 

assignment into control and treatment groups, with the control group receiving no services or

the common business practices for the site participating in the evaluation.

In their proposals, applicants are encouraged to articulate how these initiatives can be 

expanded or implemented in different jurisdictions or programmatic settings in order to build on 

the knowledge base of what works in reentry. The logic model, or reentry framework, for a 

jurisdiction or project site should fully explicate the types and sequencing of programs or 

services (i.e., concurrent, consecutive, or combining) provided to participants. Should a 

jurisdiction or project site allow for the provision of multiple programs or services to a participant, 

the proposed evaluation should include a strategy for assessing the incremental impact of each 

successive service. This knowledge will inform the field of promising combinations of programs 

 

1 For the purposes of this solicitation, NIJ encourages applicants to define recidivism as rearrest, reconviction, and 

reincarceration. Specific to rearrest, NIJ encourages the collection of technical violations and new crime data. 

Additionally, successful applicants will be expected to produce a report detailing interim study results that would 

include, but not be limited to, one-year post-release rearrest rates.
7

NIJ-2020-17295

and services. Likewise, applicants should plan to assess effective combinations of programs 

that build on, and complement, their impact towards successful reentry. Applicants may also 

consider how the core logic model of a reentry intervention could be adapted to varied 

programmatic conditions and objectives to meet different needs.

Successful applicants should expect to meet regularly with NIJ staff — either in-person or by 

phone — and provide periodic updates of evaluation progress, in addition to standard reporting 

requirements. These updates (frequency to be determined by NIJ staff in consultation with the 

successful applicant) may include information on programmatic services delivered, fidelity 

measures, current sample enrollment, and evaluation activities.

RCT Evaluation Considerations

Applicants are strongly encouraged to include the following information in the Program Narrative 

of their application:

1. A description of the reentry intervention program model with fidelity benchmarks of 

implementation activities. Applicants should describe likely model adaptions that may be 

needed at proposed evaluation sites. A discussion of how these adaptations may impact 

model fidelity should be included. If a multi-site evaluation is proposed, applicants should 

indicate how consistent implementation fidelity will be achieved.

2. An explanation of the theory of change behind the model activities. Applicants should 

clearly describe how the proposed project activities contribute to the expected outcomes, 

such as reducing recidivism. The narrative should clearly identify the data to be collected 

or that is available to measure both activities and outcomes.

3. Clear delineation (if applicable) of the relative and incremental impact of each service or 

program provided in a comprehensive reentry plan. If there are enough program 

participants to support multiple, sufficiently powered analyses (see item 5, below), 

applicants are encouraged to randomly assign participants to different combinations of 

services (or single vs. multiple programs).

4. The logic model of the evaluation. The logic model should include the randomization 

plan which outlines how the participants will be identified and randomized into either the 

treatment group(s) or the control group(s). The randomization plan should also give an 

estimate of the rate of enrollment, if the evaluation will rely on stock or flow enrollment 

(or a combination of both), and when the applicant anticipates that the target sample 

size(s) will be reached. The study should use an intent-to-treat design when analyzing 

differences between the treatment and control groups. Finally, the applicant should 

identify what reentry services, if any, the control group(s) participants will receive.

5. A power analysis. Applicants should connect the power analysis to anticipated effect 

sizes necessary to detect a difference in the treatment and control groups based on the 

services the control group will receive. If a multi-site evaluation is proposed, applicants 

should include pooled and site-specific calculations in their power analysis.

6. A discussion of likely sources of contamination in the evaluation design, and how the 

applicant proposes to mitigate contamination.
8

NIJ-2020-17295

7. A robust site description. This should include, but not be limited to, a description of any 

training and technical assistance (TTA) the site(s) has/have received, or will receive,

during the course of the evaluation, and the vendor supplying the TTA.

8. Evidence that a validated risk assessment was used to measure and confirm the risk 

levels for the offenders involved with the reentry initiative under evaluation. Applications 

should also include detailed information about the risk assessment, as well as the timing 

of the measurement, of offender risk levels, data collection tools and data collection, and 

processing procedures, including the steps for accessing data, linking records from 

multiple data sets (e.g., across the reentry continuum), and transforming administrative 

records into analytic files.

9. A discussion of outcome measures specific to recidivism and other reentry-specific 

outcomes.

Applications proposing research involving partnerships with criminal justice or other agencies 

must include a strong letter of support, signed by an appropriate decision-making authority from 

each proposed partnering agency. A letter of support must include the partnering agency’s 

acknowledgement that de-identified data provided through this project will be archived by the 

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

award (please see “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products,” below). 

If selected for an award, applicants will be expected to have a formal agreement in place with 

partnering agencies by January 1, 2021. That agreement must include provisions to meet the 

data-archiving requirements of the award.

In rare circumstances — for example, where a law prohibits the archiving of agency data — NIJ 

may agree to a successful applicant 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 an exception to be made.

Preference will be given to those proposals that include plans to measure the outcomes of 

interest, specifically recidivism, for at least 36-months. Applicants should plan their project 

timelines accordingly and this should be reflected in the project timeline submitted as part of the 

application.

Supplements may be made available at a later date to successful research projects that are 

able to implement a longer-term follow-up (i.e., longer than 3 years).

New Investigator/Early Career Opportunity 

NIJ is interested in supporting researchers who are early in their careers and new to NIJ’s 

research grant portfolios, specifically non-tenured assistant professors, or equivalent full-time 

staff scientist positions in a research institution, who propose research on topics relevant to 

NIJ’s Office of Research and Evaluation (ORE) and/or Office of Science and Technology (OST). 

To that end, NIJ may, in appropriate circumstances, give special consideration in award 

decisions to applications proposing such researchers as principal investigators (PIs). To qualify, 

the proposed PI must at the time of application submission: 

 Hold a non-tenured assistant professor appointment at an accredited institution of higher 

education in the United States or an equivalent full-time staff scientist position at a 

research institution; and 
9

NIJ-2020-17295

 Have completed a terminal degree or post-graduate clinical training within the ten (10) 

years prior to September 30, 2020, and 

 Have never previously received NIJ funding as a PI on a research project with the 

exception of Graduate Research Fellows or Data Resources Program grantees. 

If seeking to be considered for the New Investigator/Early Career Opportunity, the applicant 

should identify that they are submitting a New Investigator/Early Career proposal on the title 

page of the application.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

The primary goal of this solicitation is to advance the body of knowledge on promising practices 

in offender reentry, in part to inform federal and other reentry-specific initiatives. The objective of 

this solicitation is to advance this knowledge through the support of rigorous RCT evaluations of 

promising reentry strategies, practices, and programs. Successfully implemented RCTs have 

the greatest likelihood of providing comprehensive, reliable, and unbiased evidence to 

practitioners and policymakers seeking to implement effective interventions in their jurisdictions. 

Findings from this research will assist state, local, and tribal jurisdictions to reduce violent crime 

and protect public safety personnel by reducing recidivism among former offenders as they 

successfully reintegrate into the community.

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

submit an interim research report detailing initial study findings. The findings should include, but 

would not be limited to, 1-year post-release arrest rates. 

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

submit a final research report. Additional information on the final research report requirement 

can be found on the Research, Development, and Evaluation Grant Award Requirements page 

on the NIJ website. The Final Research Report will undergo review for public archive on the 

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS).

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.

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.

NIJ expects that there will be an equal effort to make the research findings accessible to 

practitioner and policymaker audiences through articles in trade publications, the development 
10

NIJ-2020-17295

of training manuals, policy briefs, conferences, webinars, and articles for newspapers or 

magazines.

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.

4. Number of technologies fielded as a result 

(in whole or in part) of work funded under 

the NIJ award.

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.

4. Description of all technologies 

fielded as a result (in whole or 

in part) of work funded under 

the NIJ award.
11

NIJ-2020-17295

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 decision making.

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.

OJP Priority Areas

Applications proposing activities in the following areas may be given priority consideration:

 Addresses the specific challenges that rural communities face. 

 Encouraging program investments in economically distressed communities (Qualified 

Opportunity Zones).

To receive priority consideration under the rural priority, applicants must describe what makes 

the geographic service area rural (using U.S. Census or other appropriate government data), 

how isolated the area is from needed services, and how they will address specific public safety 

challenges in rural communities.

To receive priority consideration under the Qualified Opportunity Zones priority, applicants must 

include information that specifies how the project will enhance public safety in the specified 

QOZs. For resources on QOZs, and for a current list of designated QOZs, see the U.S. 

Department of the Treasury’s resource webpage, accessible at 

https://www.cdfifund.gov/pages/opportunity-zones.aspx.
12

NIJ-2020-17295

B. Federal Award Information

Maximum number of awards NIJ expects to make: To be determined by the 

merit of applications

submitted to this solicitation 

and advanced to peer 

review, and available 

funding.

Estimated maximum dollar amount for each award: To be determined by the 

funding requested in

awarded applications, and 

available funding.

Total amount anticipated to be awarded under solicitation: $6 million

Period of performance start date: January 1, 2021

Period of performance duration: To be determined by the 

period of performance of 

awarded applications. 

Successful applicants will be 

expected to complete the 

work proposed within a fiveyear period of performance.

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, 2021.

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.) 

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 2020, 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 may, in certain cases, provide additional funding in future years to awards made under this 

solicitation, through continuation awards. In making decisions regarding continuation awards, 

OJP 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.
13

NIJ-2020-17295

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 2020 solicitation in future fiscal 

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

availability of appropriations.

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 awards under this solicitation as grants or cooperative agreements.

Cooperative agreements provide for OJP to have substantial involvement in carrying out award 

activities. See the “Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements” section of 

the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information.

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 2020 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

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

entities) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements2 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 

200.303, comply with standards for financial and program management. See OJP Grant 

Application Resource Guide for additional information.

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.

 Funds may not be used to support biomedical or behavior control experimentation on 

individuals, or any research involving such experimentation.

Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement

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

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

Information.

 

2 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.
14

NIJ-2020-17295

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

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

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

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

 Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable).

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

The following application elements must be included in the application submission for an 

application to meet the basic minimum requirements (BMR) to advance to peer review and 

receive consideration for funding: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet (including 

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.)

See the “Application Elements and Formatting Instructions” section of the OJP Grant Application 

Resource Guide for information on what happens to an application that does not contain all the 

specified elements, or that is nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation.

1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form [SF]-424)

The SF-424 is a required standard form used as a cover sheet for submission of preapplications, applications, and related information. See the OJP Grant Application Resource 

Guide for additional information on completing the SF-424.

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.
15

NIJ-2020-17295

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

project in no more than 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 Times New Roman font 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 on the NIJ webpage.

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 

negatively consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions.

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

3

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 

 

3 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.
16

NIJ-2020-17295

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 5. 

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 project-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:
17

NIJ-2020-17295

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 co-principal 

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 on the NIJ webpage to prepare 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 contract. Applicants 

should provide this list as a separate sheet entitled "Proposed non-competitive 

procurement contracts."
18

NIJ-2020-17295

For information on distinctions — for purposes of federal grants administrative 

requirements — between subawards and procurement contracts under awards, see 

“Budget Information 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 https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/humansubjects-and-privacy-protection. Note: Final IRB approval is not required at the time 

an application is submitted.

 Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to 

https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/confidentiality-and-privacy-protections and 

https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/model-privacy-certificate).

 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://nij.ojp.gov/funding/participant-support-costs-and-incentives-social-scienceresearch.

 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

https://nij.ojp.gov/funding/data-archiving-plans-nij-funding-applicants.

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.
19

NIJ-2020-17295

Note that recipients are strongly encouraged to submit required data sets at least 90 

days 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).

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

4. Budget Information and Associated Documentation in the Budget Preparation and 

Submission Information

The following paragraph (on “Cofunding”) expressly modifies the “Cost Sharing or Matching 

Requirement” provisions in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide. The applicant is to 

follow the guidance in the following paragraph instead of the guidance stated under the 

“Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement” heading in the OJP Grant Application Resource 

Guide.

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.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

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

applicant disclosure of high-risk status)

8. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

9. Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications

10. Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High-Risk Grantees4(if applicable)

11. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

 

4 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.
20

NIJ-2020-17295

12. Disclosure of Process Related to Executive Compensation

See the “Application Attachments” section of the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for 

information.

13. Additional Attachments

a. Documentation of Anticipated Benefit to Qualified Opportunity Zones

(if applicable)

As is mentioned above, OJP may, as appropriate, give priority consideration in award 

decisions to applications that propose projects that will generate information about 

enhancing public safety in the specified QOZs. Each applicant proposing a project it 

anticipates will generate information about enhancing public safety in the specified 

QOZs should provide a sufficient narrative explanation in order for OJP to identify clearly 

the public safety benefit the applicant anticipates that information generated under its 

project will have on a specified QOZ(s). The attachment(s) should be clearly labeled as 

addressing QOZs. The applicant may also include tables, charts, graphs, or other 

relevant illustrations that may be useful in comprehending the manner in which the 

proposed project is anticipated to benefit a QOZ(s).

b. Documentation of Rural Challenges (if applicable)

As is mentioned above, OJP may give priority consideration in award decisions to 

applications that address the specific public safety challenges that rural communities

face. Each applicant proposing a project that will receive priority consideration under the 

rural priority, should provide a sufficient narrative to include what makes the geographic 

service area rural (using U.S. Census or other appropriate government data), how 

isolated the area is from needed services, and how they will address specific public 

safety challenges in rural communities. The narrative must be included as an attachment 

that is clearly labeled as addressing rural challenges.

How To Apply (Grants.gov)

Applicants must register in and submit applications through Grants.gov, a primary source to find 

federal funding opportunities and apply for funding. Find information on how to apply in 

response to this solicitation in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

Registration and Submission Steps

Applicants will need the following identifying information when searching for the funding 

opportunity on Grants.gov.

 Assistance Listing 16.560, National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and 

Development Project Grants.

 NIJ-2020-17295.

For information on each registration and submission step, see the OJP Grant Application 

Resource Guide.
21

NIJ-2020-17295

E. Application Review Information

Review Criteria

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

the following review criteria.

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.

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).
22

NIJ-2020-17295

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.

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 strength 

and feasibility 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.

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.

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, achievable, and consistent with the solicitation.

The following five paragraphs in this solicitation expressly modify the “Application Review 

Information” provisions in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide. An applicant is to follow 

the guidance in these five paragraphs instead of the guidance stated under the “Application 

Review Information” heading in the Guide.

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.
23

NIJ-2020-17295

 The application must include all items necessary to meet the basic minimum 

requirements.

 The application, if submitted by an applicant that is a DOJ High-Risk Grantee,5 or is 

designated “high-risk” by a federal grant-making agency outside of DOJ, must not have 

been determined by the Director 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 application elements that MUST be included in the application submission in 

order for an application to meet the basic minimum requirements, 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, but are considered carefully.

Other important considerations for NIJ include geographic diversity, strategic priorities 

(specifically including, but not limited to, addressing public safety challenges that rural 

communities face and/or demonstrable potential enhancement to public safety in one or more 

federally designated Qualified Opportunity Zones), available funding, 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.

Pursuant to the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before award decisions are made, OJP also 

reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by the applicant. 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 above the applicant that appears in the non-public 

segment of the integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the 

Federal Awardee Performance 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.

 

5 See “Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High-Risk Grantees” under “What an Application Should Include,” 

above, for a definition of “DOJ High-Risk Grantee.”
24

NIJ-2020-17295

All final award decisions will be made by 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.

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements

OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information on post-award legal 

requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an application.

If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the OJPapproved application, the recipient must comply with all award conditions, and all applicable 

requirements of federal statutes and regulations (including applicable requirements referred to 

in the assurances and certifications executed in connection with award acceptance). 

For additional information on these legal requirements, see the “Administrative, National Policy, 

and Other Legal Requirements” section in the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide.

Information Technology (IT) Security Clauses

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

In addition to the deliverables described in Section A. Program Description, any recipient of an 

award under this solicitation will be required to submit certain 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.)

See the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for additional information on specific postaward reporting requirements, including performance measures data.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

For questions directed to the Federal Awarding Agency, see NCJRS contact information on 

page 2.

For contact information for Grants.gov, see page 2.
25

NIJ-2020-17295

H. Other Information

Please see the OJP Grant Application Resource Guide for information on the following:

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

 Provide Feedback to OJP.
26

NIJ-2020-17295

Application Checklist

Research and Evaluation of Promising Reentry Initiatives, Fiscal Year 2020

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 OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

To Register with Grants.gov:

 Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see OJP Grant Application Resource 

Guide)

To Find Funding Opportunity:

 Search for the Funding Opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 20)

 Access Funding Opportunity and Application Package

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional)

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 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 OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

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 OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

If No Grants.gov Receipt, and Validation or Error Notifications are Received:

 Contact NIJ regarding experiencing technical difficulties

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements:

 Review the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and 

Cooperative Agreements – FY 2020 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Scope Requirement:

 The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s).

Eligibility Requirement: See cover page.
27

NIJ-2020-17295

What an Application Should Include:

 Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 14)

 Project Abstract (see page 14)

 Program Narrative (see page 15)

 Budget Detail Worksheet (including Narrative)

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Applicant Disclosure and Justification – DOJ High-Risk Grantees (if applicable)

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

Additional Attachments:

 Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Request and Justification for Employee Compensation; Waiver (if applicable)

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Documentation of anticipated benefit to federally designated Qualified Opportunity Zones 

(if applicable) (see page 20)

 Documentation of rural challenges (if applicable) (see page 20)

The following items are critical application elements required to pass Basic Minimum 

Requirements review. An application that OJP determines does not include the application 

elements that must be included in the application submission in order for the application to 

meet the basic minimum requirements, will neither proceed to peer review, nor receive 

further consideration.

 Program Narrative (see page 15)

 Budget Detail Worksheet (including Budget Narrative)

(see OJP Grant Application Resource Guide)

 Resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel (see page 14)
 

 

 

Funding Opportunities through NIJ for 

Research and Evaluation of Promising Reentry Practices, 

Fiscal Year 2020 

Solicitation: NIJ-2020-17295 

Solicitation Post Date: January 23, 2020 

Solicitation Close Date: May 5, 2020 11:59 PM EDT 

Today’s Presenters: 

Eric D. Martin, Social Science Analyst, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Technology, National Institute of Justice 

Marie Garcia, Senior Social Science Analyst, Office of the Director, National Institute of Justice 
Webinar Overview 

• NIJ Overview 

• Corrections Research at NIJ 

• Promising Reentry Initiatives Portfolio 

• What’s New in FY20 

• How to Apply 

• Important Considerations 
 

 

 

 

National Institute of Justice (NIJ) 

Who we are: 

• NIJ is the research, development, and evaluation agency of the 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Our mission: 

• Improving knowledge and understanding of crime and justice 

issues through science 
 

 

NIJ Overview 

• Research, Development and Evaluation arm of the Department 

of Justice 

• NIJ has two research offices: 

• Office of Research Evaluation and Technology 

• Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences 

• NIJ Director serves as the Chief Evaluation Officer for DOJ 

• NIJ hosts CrimeSolutions.gov, a repository of evaluation 

evidence 
Corrections Related Research at NIJ 

• Supports research on Institutional and Community 

Corrections, and Offender Reentry 

• Dedicated solicitations requesting corrections and 

reentry-focused evaluation research 

• Other relevant research opportunities: 

• Graduate Research Fellowship 

• Safety, Health and Wellness 

• Artificial Intelligence 
 

 

 

NIJ Investment in Corrections and Reentry Research 

• Initiated 22 corrections research projects since 2018 

• ~ $20 million investment 

• Projects include: 

• Development of AI algorithms to assist community supervision 

• Medication-Assisted Treatment for opioid addiction 

• Risk-Needs-Responsivity program evaluations 

• Alternative young adult housing programs 

• Evaluation of body-worn cameras in jails 

• Correction officer occupational prestige 
 

NIJ’s Promising Reentry Initiatives Portfolio 

Program goal: 

• Build a body of knowledge on reentry strategies, practices and programs 

• Use only the most rigorous research design 

First NIJ solicitation to ask explicitly for RCTs: 

• FY18: 5 awards = $6.2 million total funding 

• FY19: 5 awards = $5.3 million total funding 
 

 

 

Snapshot of Promising Reentry Topics 

Notable evaluations of: 

• Job Interview training using Virtual Reality 

• Jail-based reentry program 

• Reentry programing during PO home visits 

• New evolution of CBT 

• Web-based reentry planning and management tool 

All previous awards are single-site evaluations 
 

 

NIJ Interests for FY20 Promising Reentry Solicitation 

Preference will be given to: 

• Randomized controlled trials 

• Multi-site evaluations of innovative reentry initiatives 

• Evaluations that include at least 36-months of outcome measurement 

Particularly focus: 

• Reentry initiatives that begin in a correctional setting and continue upon 

release 
 

 

 

Other Considerations 

Successful applications should include: 

• Letters of Support or Memoranda of Understanding from all proposed 

program implementers 

• A logic model that articulates how the evaluation will capture data on all 

program activities 

• A research design that captures the incremental impact of multiple programs or 

services (where applicable) 
 

Application Critical Elements 

Critical Elements: 

• Program narrative 

• Budget detail worksheet (including budget narrative) 

• Resumes/CVs for key personnel 

• Principal Investigator 

• Any and all Co-Principal Investigators 
Application Evaluation Criteria 

External Peer Review Panelists will evaluate each application on: 

• Statement of the Problem and Research Questions (15%) 

• Project Design and Implementation (50%) 

• Potential Impact (15%) 

• Capabilities and Competencies (20%) 

Other non-scored criteria: 

• Dissemination Plan 

• Budget 
 

 

Qualities of Successful Proposals 

Successful Proposals: 

• Include a rigorous research design 

• Explain how measures will answer proposed questions 

• Clearly show what data will be used for what measures 

• Demonstrate willingness of jurisdictions to participate in research and share 

data 
 

Learn about NIJ Funding 

Read the 

FAQs 

Read active 

solicitations 

Read past 

solicitations 

for examples 

Sign up for email 

updates when 

solicitations post 

Solicitations 

Past 

Awards 

Go to www.nij.gov & click on FUNDING & AWARDS 

www.nij.gov
 

 

 

For more information: 

Reentry webpage: www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/reentry 

For questions about the Promising Reentry Initiative solicitation, contact: 

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) 

1-800-851-3420 (TTY: 301-240-6310 for hearing impaired only) 

Email: Grants@ncjrs.gov 

Web chat: https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp 

Sign up to receive the bi-weekly JUSTINFO newsletter, and the weekly Funding 

News From NCJRS email. 
 

 

Stay Connected 

NIJ Website: 

• nij.ojp.gov 

Subscribe: 

• Receive email updates on publications, videos, webinars, and solicitations. 

Text OJP NIJ [your email address] to 468-311 to subscribe. *Message and data rates may 

apply. 

Social Media: 

• Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/OJPNIJ 

• Twitter – https://twitter.com/OJPNIJ 
 

 

Application Assistance 

Grants.gov 

• Provides technical assistance with submitting an application: 

• Customer Support Hotline – 800-518-4726 or 606-545-5035 

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

holidays. 

• Email 

• support@grants.gov 

Website 

• https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html 

• Provides information on available federal funding opportunities for various federal agencies. 
Recommended Resources 

OJP Funding Resource Center 

– https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm 

OJP Grant Application Resource Guide 

– https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/Grant-App-Resource-Guide.htm 

DOJ Grants Financial Guide 

– https://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/index.htm 

DOJ Grants Financial Management Online Training 

– https://ojpfgm.webfirst.com/ 

NIJ CrimeSolutions.Gov 

– https://www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/faqs.aspx 
Please submit questions using the Q&A box and 

selecting all panelists. 
i

Funding Webinar Transcript 

On February 21, 2020, NIJ hosted a webinar that provided an overview of this solicitation. Following are 

the transcript and slide presentation from that webinar.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Good afternoon, everybody. And welcome to today’s webinar, “Funding 

Opportunities through NIJ for the Research and Evaluation of Promising Reentry Practices, Fiscal Year 

2020.” I would like to introduce you to today’s presenter, Eric Martin, Social Science Analyst with the 

National Institute of Justice, and Marie Garcia, Senior Social Science Analyst with the National Institute of 

Justice.

MARIE GARCIA: Thank you, Mary Jo. Good afternoon, everyone. This is Marie Garcia. I’m a Senior Social 

Science Analyst here at NIJ. And thank you for joining us today for our webinar on the Research and 

Evaluation of Promising Reentry Practices for the Fiscal Year 2020. With today’s webinar, we will go over 

information for you to know for the solicitation this year, and for your application considerations. First, 

we’ll go over:

• NIJ generally — who we are, what we do;

• Our corrections research portfolio here at NIJ;

• Our reentry portfolio at NIJ;

• What’s new in the solicitation in 2020, how to apply to the solicitation, and 

• Some important considerations for you when considering applying for our solicitation this year.

NIJ is the research, development, and evaluation agency of the Department of Justice. Our mission is to 

improve knowledge and understanding of crime and justice issues through science. Our main goal is to 

make sure that our research that we fund is supporting the men and women who engage work in criminal 

justice every day. So, we want to make sure that our research has practical applications to them and has 

empirical applications as well.

NIJ, as the research arm of DOJ, has two research offices. We have the Office of Research Evaluation and 

Technology. Now in this office, we have a majority of our social science research, as well as our technology 

research and development. In this particular office, you’ll find research about policing, corrections, reentry, 

drugs and crime, body armor, body-worn cameras, anything and everything that has, again, practical 

applications for practitioners in the field.

And then we also have the Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences. Our colleagues in OIFS engage in a 

diverse set of activities with regard to anthropology, other forensic sciences, chemistry, and biology. They 

do really interesting and creative research in the forensic science offices. Our NIJ Director is Dr. David 

Muhlhausen, and he serves as the Chief Evaluation Officer for the Department of Justice. Additionally, NIJ 

hosts CrimeSolutions.gov. Crime Solutions is a repository of evaluation evidence that has been very wellreceived by the field. I would encourage you, if you’ve not yet seen or perused our website, to please do 

so. Again, it’s CrimeSolutions.gov.

ERIC MARTIN: Thanks, Marie. My name is Eric Martin, and Marie and I are working this solicitation 

together. We both alternate who’s going to lead the solicitation. We’ve been with Promising Reentry 

Initiatives since the onset. Now, Marie gave you a little bit of background of who we are at NIJ, if you 

weren’t familiar. I also want to dedicate just a little bit of time, before we go into this specific solicitation,

to talk about corrections research in general at NIJ. I think it’s important for you, as prospective applicants,
ii

to understand that we may be funding and driving research related to offender reentry from a number of 

different angles at NIJ. Corrections research is definitely one of the main priorities for the agency.

We have research solicitations on both institutional and community corrections. And as you can imagine, 

both portfolios, writ large, overlap when it comes to specific projects dealing with reentry. The reentryfocused solicitation, as we’re going to talk about in a minute, is relatively new. But we’ve had dedicated 

corrections solicitations in the past. The last one we did was in FY ‘18. We also fund a number of 

corrections-related research projects from various solicitations that, just based on the title, you wouldn’t 

know particularly were related to corrections research. Our Graduate Research Fellowship Program, which 

is on the street right now, funds dissertation research for PhD candidates interested in criminal justice and 

criminology. We always have a handful of corrections-related dissertations that we’re funding. Any one of 

them could be focused on reentry.

Safety, health, and wellness —another solicitation that’s on the street right now —has done research on 

correctional officer health and well-being. We currently have a topic related to police and correctional 

officer, health and safety right now, and we’ve done so in the past. Also last year: We had a dedicated 

artificial intelligence and support for community corrections solicitation. We funded two projects — both, 

again, are related to reentry.

The reason we’re presenting this information to you is so you can take some time and really familiarize 

yourself with the breadth of what we’re doing at NIJ, and also see where your research that you propose 

could build on some ongoing NIJ work. And just so you know: It doesn’t necessarily have to have

corrections or reentry in the title to be funding research related to your topic.

[[Timestamp: 8:58]]

Just to recap a little bit: Since 2018, we’ve initiated 22 different corrections-related research projects. As

far as research coming out of the social science side and the science and technology, not OIFS that Marie 

talked about earlier, this has been the largest share of investment in any one given topic. I know 

corrections is broad, and tends to be broader than the other criminal justice areas, so to speak. But we 

have had a dedicated push from the current administration and our NIJ Director to create sound research 

on corrections and reentry.

Those 22 projects represent approximately a $20,000,000 investment. We consider every project we 

funded very valuable to the field and innovative. Just to show some of the diversity with what we’ve been 

doing recently:

1. We are funding the development of artificial intelligence algorithms to assist community 

supervision officers, and especially to be able to intervene in parolees and probationary who are at 

immediate risk of recidivism. 

2. [We are supporting] medicated assisted treatment for opioid addiction. This is particularly in a jail 

setting. We’ve engaged in numerous R&R program evaluations and are definitely trying to facilitate 

some of the next generation of R&R theory in practice.

3. We are conducting an evaluation of an Alternative Young Adult Housing Program in South Carolina,

that was adopted from Connecticut.
iii

4. We are funding an evaluation of body-worn cameras in jails, worn by their correctional officers.

5. We’re also studying correctional officer occupational prestige.

Now, obviously not all of those are related to reentry, but many of them had an either explicit or a 

tangential reentry goal.

So, a little bit about the Promising Reentry Initiatives solicitation. It came online in fiscal year 2018. This 

was a direct priority from the administration to our NIJ Director. It came in late in the funding cycle,

but our Director and NIJ staff saw an opportunity, given the funding stream and this priority, to ensure 

that we’re informing the field with rigorous research. This was the first NIJ solicitation that I can 

remember that I’ve been a part of that explicitly sought randomized controlled trials. We’ve done 

demonstrations of a specific program before, but this one was the first open-ended evaluation 

solicitation that sought to fund RCTs. We now have similar efforts going on in policing and other 

criminal justice areas. We are asking for practitioners and for jurisdictions to look at our research, to 

look at crime solutions that Marie talked about and see what programs and what strategies may be 

beneficial to their own organization. They have limited resources, as far as time and staff, to be able to 

adapt a new program. And we want to make sure that their thought process is informed by the most 

rigorous evidence that we could provide the field.

We’ve funded ten awards in this funding stream since its inception, five each year. The first year was 

around $6,000,000 in total funding. And the second year was around $5,000,000 in total funding.

[[Timestamp: 13:18]]

Here are some notable topics, [which we considered] extremely innovative and we’re excited about. To 

show some of the diversity and the range we’ve had. You can get all the award information for the past 

two years on our website.

1. We’re funding an evaluation of job interview training program using virtual reality. 

2. We are facilitating an evaluation of a jail-based reentry program. Jails are definitely of interest to 

NIJ, and to see how reentry works in a jail setting when you have the constant turn of detainees 

and offenders coming in and out. You have a very delineated and finite amount of time to work 

with them. So, we want to know how that can best be carried off in that setting.

3. We funded a continuation of past research from NIJ, on how to engage in reentry and R&R 

programming during a home visit with a parolee.

4. We’re evaluating a new iteration of CBT— kind of CBT next generation. 

5. Also, a new web-based reentry planning and management tool.

But all of our previous awards are single-site evaluations. And this creates a perfect segue to what I’m 

going to go talk about now. This is somewhat the meat of the webinar, if you will. This is what Marie 

and I really wanted to convey to you, how our NIJ interests have changed, our new interest that we 

really want to communicate to perspective applicants for the fiscal year ‘20 iteration of the solicitation.
iv

Similar to last year and the year before, preference will be given to randomized control trials. We do 

not say you have to submit an RCT design to participate, but preference will be given to them. And as 

you’ve heard in the previous slide, we’ve made ten awards, and all have been for RCTs. So we are not 

having to sift through a number of applications to find these designs. These rigorous designs are 

coming to us. The vast majority are RCTs, if not all of them. I can’t remember explicitly. But the field 

has responded to our request wholeheartedly in that aspect.

What’s different for FY ’20: Preference will be given to proposals that have a multi-site evaluation 

research design. We’ve added a lot of time on the solicitation for it to be out in the street compared to 

our colleagues in other solicitations at NIJ. We want to give you the time to get this together. We are 

really interested in making fewer, but bigger, awards for multi-site evaluation. This is the interest that’s 

been communicated to us from NIJ leadership. And as you know, and we’ll cover at the end, all funding 

decisions are made under the authority of the NIJ Director. So, we don’t know how it’s going to turn 

out at the end. And you are not prohibited from participating if you have a single-site evaluation idea,

or one that you’re proposing. But we really want to communicate to you that we are interested in 

funding multi-site evaluations. And we’re leaving it up to the field.

We’ve had a lot of success with this in the past two years. [Solicitations have] come to us with the best 

and most innovative programs with rigorous designs to evaluate those programs. We’re not mandating 

a specific program to be evaluated. We’re leaving that up to you. I think we’re getting a really 

exemplary diversity of different initiatives that are going on in the country today. Our funded 

researchers are really putting those programs to the test with some rigorous designs.

We’re also going to be giving preference to evaluations that include at least three years of outcome 

measurement. And as always, with this solicitation, one of the primary outcomes has to be recidivism 

reduction. What that means is you may be evaluating something specific like the job training using 

virtual reality program that I discussed in the previous slide. But it has to be connected to recidivism in 

order to participate in the solicitation.

Something new for this fiscal year: We’re really interested in reentry initiatives that began in a 

correctional setting and then continue upon release. We’re leaving this open-ended as well as far as 

how you define that. That could be a specific, particular program that starts within the correctional 

setting, prior to release, and then continues on after release. Or it could be a strategy consisting of 

multiple services and programs —somewhat of a reentry plan, if you will. But either way, we are really 

interested in initiatives that start inside a correctional facility and then continue, especially that 

transition period between pre-release to the early part of reentry.

Now, again, you can submit a proposal that evaluates a program that is completely independent at a 

correctional facility that is just administered to already reentered offenders. That is fine. But successful 

applications will include some type of commitment from all the program implementers. This could be

an MOU, Memorandum of Understanding would be the gold standard if you will, the best. But if you 

cannot secure those by the time you submit, then some kind of letter of support that endorses their 

participation in your application proposal.

NIJ Staff, Marie and I, our external peer review team and NIJ leadership go through a number of these 

applications. One of the questions that is always in the back of our heads is: Will this be implemented 

as designed, as it’s being talked about in this proposal? Will the site agree to go along with that plan?
v

Secondly, [include] a logic model that articulates how the evaluation will capture data on all program 

activities. This is another one that can be very confusing for a reader of a proposal. And we understand, 

you are neck-deep in the research you’re doing, and your program implementer is implementing a 

program. This is very technical, and it has a lot of technical knowledge. It may be difficult to 

communicate that on a page and to a reader that has no idea of what you’re doing or the jurisdiction 

you’re working with. So, before you submit, I suggest really trying to reread it or have a colleague or a 

friend read that and make sure that they could see, “Okay, this activity is going to be done for this 

treatment. This is the dose for that treatment or service.” “This is how data is going to be captured on 

that. That’s how that’s going to feed into the design.” That’s pretty much what we’re talking about 

here.

Finally, where you’re studying perhaps multiple services given to a reentered offender, or multiple 

programs that are going on in a reentry plan: We’re really interested in research designs that capture 

the incremental impact of those services and programs, so that you can parse out: “This [specific] 

service is contributing to this [particular] recidivism reduction. There’s a key motive additive effect if 

we include this service.” So when we talk about how we’re going to use these research findings to 

communicate to the field what are some really effective programs going on, they could really 

understand the expectations. “Well, if we can’t do X, Y and Z, but we can do X and Y, this is what we 

can try to hope to get as far as our recidivism reduction.” Those are pretty much the bulk [elements] of 

what we’re really interested in, at this iteration of the solicitation. And now, I’ll go ahead and turn it 

over to my colleague, Marie, to close out the webinar. Thank you.

[Timestamp: 23:37]

MARIE GARCIA: Thank you, Eric. So, as part of your application submission process, there are several 

critical elements. And the bullets here, outline three, but there are actually four. And I’ll walk you through 

those.

1. The first is a 30-page program narrative. Again, this is a critical element. The solicitation is very 

clear about what should be included in your narrative.

2. The second critical element is the budget detail worksheet, including the budget narrative. So, 

remember, there are two elements here, the worksheet, which lays out the mathematics behind 

the cost of your project,

3. Then you need to actually verbally, in writing, explain the cost of your project, which is the 

narrative.

4. The fourth element here is the resumes for your key personnel. Now this includes PIs as well as any 

and all co-investigators. We want to be very clear that —if you have three or four staff [members] 

for example, identified as PIs or Co-PIs — every single person has to have a vita, or a resume, or a 

biographical sketch in the application for the application to be moved on to peer review. Now if 

your application is missing any one of these elements, you will not be contacted by NIJ and asked 

to submit it. If it doesn’t include it, your proposal will not move forward to the next phase. So 

perhaps submit your proposal a couple of days in advance so that we can actually check the 

proposal to make sure all of the elements are in there. And if you’ve actually missed something, 

you have an opportunity to upload it before the solicitation closes.

So please be sure that these four elements are included in your application.
vi

after the basic minimum requirement review, they will go onto the peer review. Now again, this is 

competitive grant process. So we send all of our proposals it external peer review. Now these are 

individuals with research degrees, research backgrounds, as well as practitioners with experience 

and expertise in criminal justice.

Your applications are reviewed based on certain criteria: The statement of the problem and the 

research question; the project design and implementation; the potential impact of the research to 

the field of criminal justice, and the capabilities and competencies of the staff that are part of the 

research team. Now you’ll note that the project design and implementation is over half of where 

the scoring will take place. So we encourage our applicants to really focus in on this particular 

section given the weight in the overall score.

We have two other non-scored criterions: The Dissemination Plan and the Budget. Again. Both of 

these are very important. We don’t score them anymore, but they are very important. A project 

budget is required. And one thing that I would also encourage you to do is make sure you review 

the data archiving plan on page 18 of the solicitation. As Eric mentioned, should you have MOUs or 

letters of support from Criminal Justice agencies that are going to be working with you on this 

project, we want to make sure that we have a data agreement in place so that we know what types 

of information you will be archiving at the end of the project.

Because the funding that we provided is federal public funding, we have to make sure that all of 

our information is made public at the end of your project. So please make sure you take good care 

to look at the data archiving plan requirement. Now with regards to a successful proposal, as Eric 

mentioned, we would like to see a rigorous research design. The director’s preference is a 

randomized control trial, but we want to make sure that the questions that you pose and that you 

want to answer in this project are addressed using the most rigorous design.

Another key issue is explaining how your measures will answer the proposed questions. You want 

to clearly show what data will be used for what measures. We want to understand how your data 

and your questions all align with the overall research design.

And importantly, as my colleague mentioned, you want to demonstrate the willingness of 

jurisdictions to participate in the research and to share data. If an MOU is impossible within 90 

days for the submission process, a letter of intent, a letter of support is very helpful, an MOU 

would be fantastic, but again, we want to make sure that the jurisdiction is very aware of the data 

that you will need and as well as our data requirement here at NIJ.

[Timestamp: 29:02]

So to learn about our funding here at the agency, our website — has just been recently revised. 

You can go onto our website, and look at the past awards that we’ve made in this solicitation. You 

can find out what we currently have available with regard to all of our RSPs, as well as forthcoming 

RSPs in this fiscal year. And you could also sign up for updates when our solicitations post. For 

more information on the reentry research that NIJ has funded, you can go to the page here in this 

link: www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/reentry.

If you have questions that we don’t answer today, or you have questions over the next few months 

about the reentry solicitation, you should email the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, 
vii 

NCJRS, at Grants@ncjrs.gov. or you can actually send them a web chat, at: 

https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. 

Now I will turn it over to Mary Jo.

[Timestamp: 30:00]

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Hi, everybody. I hope you’re all doing well today. As Marie said, if you have any 

questions that remain after today’s webinar or if we’re unable to get to your question today, please send 

them to NCJRS, at Grants@ncjrs.gov, or call them at 1-800-851-3420. You definitely want to stay connected 

to NIJ, and there’s several ways that you can do that. 

Obviously you can visit the NIJ website at nij.ojp.gov, and you can also subscribe to receive their email 

updates. There’s a new way to subscribe, it’s quite easy, you can text them. You’ll send the message to OJP 

NIJ, and then insert your email address, and send that to 468-311. Please note that message and data rates 

may apply. This will sign you up for an email that will announce new publications, videos, webinar 

opportunities, solicitations and so forth. 

You can also follow NIJ on Facebook and Twitter, the url for both of those are listed here: 

https://www.faceboook.com/OJPNIJ, and https://twitter.com/OOJPNIJ. 

During your application process, if you happen to need assistance for technical problems, uploading files to 

Grants.gov or anything of that nature, please contact Grants.gov. You can reach their customer support 

hotline at 1-800-518-4726 or at 606-545-5035. They are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on 

federal holidays. You can also email them at support@grants.gov, and their website is 

http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html. 

There are a series of resources recommended. Earlier in the presentation, the NIJ Crime Solutions website 

was mentioned. Its url is: https://www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/faqs.aspx. 

The other items here are the OJP Funding Resource Center, https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm, and OJP 

Grant Application Resource Guide, https://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/Grant-App-ResourceGuide.htm. That can help you as you fill out your application and move through the process. The other 

resource that would be of great assistance is the DOJ Financial Guide and that’ll come in handy when 

you’re submitting your budgets or have any type of budget question, 

https://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/index.htm. DOJ also offers a Grant Financial Management Online 

Training that might be of assistance to you, at https://ojpfgm.webfirst.com/. 

[Timestamp: 33:00]

At this time, we are going to get into our questions. So we’re going to start with our first question. For 

multi-state, is there a preference for multiple states or multiple sites within a state?

ERIC MARTIN: I’m getting this one, Marie. We don’t really have a preference either way, we just want to 

enhance the generalizability of the findings. Any way you can look for other sites that may be willing to 

implement a similar program, or are implementing the same program, we’re really interested in that, 

whether it’s multi-state, multi-region, multi-city — it’s really up to what you can accomplish. We’re leaving 

much of this open-ended on purpose. in order to get the best of the best so to speak: the most, innovative 

designs and evaluations that the field can come up with.
viii

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Does the research and evaluation have to be conducted on an existing program. or 

can they better propose to design and implement a new program?

MARIE GARCIA: For the purposes of this solicitation, either would be appropriate. You can apply to 

evaluate an existing program, or you can propose to design and implement a new program. The one 

qualifier for this particular question would be if the applicant is both developing the program or service,

and then wants to evaluate it and implement it later, please be cautious of our research independence and 

integrity statement, because we really need to see an independence between the evaluation of the service 

or programs, versus the actual development of it. Both are appropriate, but you want to make sure that 

you tell us where that independence and integrity lies with that particular design, should you submit it that 

way.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: What are the guidelines for submission of the profit and management?

MARIE GARCIA: One of the links in the solicitation is the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, their financial 

guide. Eric and I aren’t budget analysts, so we can’t answer that particular question. But you should be able 

to find your answer in the financial guide, at https://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/index.htm.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: My proposal would be focused on juveniles and their reentry into school after 

being in adult facilities and juvenile facilities. Does this fit into the needs for your research data?

ERIC MARTIN: Yes, you can submit programs that deal with juveniles. In the past, we’ve specifically called 

them out, but we were not prohibiting applications for juveniles, or adults, or just restricting it to one or 

the other.

MARIE GARCIA: Last year we acquired social science staff that focus specifically on juvenile justice 

programs.

And services for juveniles that are involved in the system, so we are encouraging the submission of both 

adult and juvenile proposal for this solicitation.

.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: It seems like there’s more interest in programs than practices. Is this the case?

ERIC MARTIN: When you go into the actual solicitation, the reason we use initiatives is to put a general allencompassing term that could relate to strategies, practices, or programs. But to answer your question, I 

think some of that is just natural, given the RCT component. I think some of it is easier to apply to a standalone program with a defined treatment. But we’ve done RCTs, and strategies, and practices before. Both 

in corrections and in policing, so we’ve seen what those look like and we welcome them as well.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: So we are planning a research project evaluating a program that cannot be 

structured as an RCT for ethical and practical reasons. But it meets the other criteria, even the preferences.

We’re building as rigorous a design as we can. Should we bother to apply?

MARIE GARCIA: Absolutely. We would encourage you to apply. Again, our preference is the randomized 

controlled trial, but as Eric mentioned in his discussion point, we’ve not only funded RCTs. So as long as you 
ix

detail in the application why an RCT was not appropriate, that would make it an absolutely viable 

candidate for review and potential funding here at the agency. So I would encourage you to apply.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Does the cost/benefit analysis need to be included in the proposal or is it just 

preferred?

ERIC MARTIN: It definitely is preferred. If you do not have a DBA attached to it, if you don’t have the ability 

to get that information or whatnot, it necessarily wouldn’t be a strike against the proposal. It’s hard 

because we don’t really want to comment on individual designs and proposals, given that the solicitation’s 

already on the street. But one thing I’ll say in general terms that I think it may be helpful to think about, 

and this relates to this question and the previous one, and some of the others, as well:

There’s the basic minimum requirements, those critical elements that you need to have in order for us to 

give it a valid review. So that we can give all the information [to] the external peer review team that they 

need to have to evaluate the application. And then all the proposals that meet that criteria get divided up 

among the different peer review panels. And then they help us through their evaluation criteria of the 

application identify the best of the best. And then the NIJ staff, like Maria and myself, will read those 

applications and come up with our own recommendations and those recommendations go up the NIJ 

leadership chain, and then the NIJ Director has sole funding authority.

Now there’s a number of different considerations that go into the director’s decision. It could be other 

funding initiatives that this solicitation is competing with, priorities coming from the administration or 

congress, his own preferences. So there’s a number of different factors that go into any given funding 

decision. The best advice I could give is just make sure that your question is interesting. That this program, 

or initiative, or practice that you want to evaluate is important to the field, that the design you’re 

proposing is the most rigorous possible, given all the different factors of where it’s being implemented, 

what different sites, what data is available and whatnot. So that’s just putting you in the best possible light 

to compete for a very finite amount of funding. I know that’s very long-winded, but I hope that kind of —

answers some of these questions.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Can randomization occur by site versus within a given site in a multi-site 

evaluation?

ERIC MARTIN: Yes, as long as we can identify the randomization scheme. And one thing we say in the 

solicitation is: identify for us, in your proposals, any pitfall to the randomization scheme. Is there a 

potential for contamination for the design you’re proposing? Is there any kind of bias that’s being 

introduced, that you’re trying to correct for? And I know RCTs tend to correct for that, but a lot of times 

programs rely on volunteer participation. How do you correct for that, or try to augment that to really 

increase the generalizability?

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: How do I submit a proposal? Is it through Grants.gov and is it due in 90 days?

MARIE GARCIA: So on the second page of the solicitation, it provides information about where to submit 

your proposal and yes, you will submit it through Grants.gov. And the solicitation will close May 5th. So it’s 

on or about 90 days, but on May 5th, your applications are due at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time.

ERIC MARTIN: And if I could jump in, Marie. I know that was a very complete answer. But one thing Marie 

said in the presentation that I — want to emphasize: that cutoff is a hard stop for us. This is a competitive 
x

solicitation. We want to be fair across the board. One thing I would suggest is submit early because you 

may find one of those critical elements didn’t get put into the application package like you thought. And if 

you still have a day or two, you can go ahead and re-submit that, and you’re fine, if everything goes 

through. But it always happens and it’s unfortunate and it’s hard for us, too. We get contacted by 

prospective applicants that say, “Well, we thought we had this here but there was a miscommunication, 

this didn’t get in. Can we submit it to you, or can we send you this information?” And unfortunately the 

solicitation has very defined parameters and if there’s a technical issue when you’re trying to submit, and 

you can’t, we will deal with that. But other than that, there’s really not a lot of leeway for outside materials 

to come in after the closing time.

[Timestamp: 46.15]

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: What is the budget cap duration of the project?

MARIE GARCIA: So this year, we have up to six million dollars available in funding.

And we hope that, given the parameter of the 36 months that we’re looking for with our outcome, the 

project should be long enough to actually measure 36 months, so between 48 months and 60 months is 

ideal. We do have a strong cutoff point here at OJP with regard to the length of our grants.

So the most important thing is to make sure that you’re able to measure your outcome for the appropriate 

amount of time. And you want to make sure you buffer in time at the beginning of your project and at the 

end, again, for human-subjects review, and other kind of budgetary delays, and for preparing your data 

archiving, and for your final reports, and your final submissions. So please take that into consideration 

when developing the timeline for your projects.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Have any past recipients have their programs implemented permanently?

MARIE GARCIA: Well, this particular solicitation has been on the ground since 2018. So we don’t yet have 

an answer to this particular question. But we are evaluating programs. We’re not necessarily implementing 

programs. But down the line, we’ll be able to answer this question more clearly.

ERIC MARTIN: And just to piggyback on what Marie said: I don’t know if you may have heard it, the 2018 

solicitation came out later, given that it, you know, it’s a relatively new priority from the administration. So 

the projects, it funded actually are [running] pretty much going concurrently with the projects that the 

2019 solicitation funded. So, you know, there is a little bit of a delay in that, but the good news is, in a 

couple years, we’re going to have a number of different evaluations coming online that we could share 

with the field.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: The solicitation mentions an interest in rural areas. Is this still a priority?

MARIE GARCIA: Yes. This is a priority for the administration, and for NIJ, and the department. Rural reentry 

is a big issue generally across the state, when we have as many jails as we do in rural communities, and 

individuals returning to the community. Or we’ve had a tough time, actually, assessing programs, and 

services, and practices in these areas, so yes, this is absolutely a priority for this solicitation.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Building on a multi-site: can the multiple sites be in a continuum of care? For 

example, a prison to a community, or a jail to a community program?
xi

ERIC MARTIN: We don’t want to discuss specifics of applications too much, given that this is currently on 

the street. And the multi-site aspect of the solicitation is the preference for NIJ. So the best advice that 

Maria or I could give is just make sure that that design is as rigorous as possible. There isn’t any checklist or 

box, we could say “Well, that’s multi-site, or it’s not.” But just know you’re going to be competing against a 

number of quality applications for a finite amount of funding, so just make sure the problem is important, 

the question is relevant, and that the research design you’re proposing is rigorous.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: If a proposal occurs in a prison system that does not have an established risk-need 

assessment, does that exclude the proposal?

ERIC MARTIN: No.

MARIE GARCIA: No. Your proposal would not be excluded. What we would want is more information about 

how you’re going to actually assess some level of risk, and how risk and programs are actually related in 

that department. We just would need more information about the impact this could have on your design 

and in your overall project. Eric, did you have anything that you’d like to add?

ERIC MARTIN: No. We understand that not every correctional system is using a risk-assessment, even 

though they’re proliferating across the country. We want research that is done in settings that are realistic 

to the needs of the practitioners. I think Marie answered it spot-on. Just any other additional information 

you can use to supplement it, would be great.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Thank you, Eric. Are both profit and non-profit agencies eligible to submit to this 

proposal?

MARIE GARCIA: You are encouraged to look at page one of the solicitation. Our eligibility requirements are 

listed there in terms of who the entities that are eligible to apply. It’s very clear, and if it’s not clear, please 

do submit a question to NCJRS so we can take care of that for you.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: How many projects are you planning to fund, and is there a limit on the amount of 

funding or number of years of the project?

MARIE GARCIA: The solicitation doesn’t actually give a number for the amount of projects that we plan to 

fund. Again, we have six million dollars available for funding this year. You can come in for six million 

dollars if you’d like to or you can come in for half of that, however you want to budget your project is really 

up to you. So as long as the budget fits the overall project, that’s the ideal situation.

And the number of years: We are looking specifically for 36-month follow-ups on the outcome tier. So you 

want to make sure that your timeline is appropriate to be able to measure the 36 months. We have a finite 

amount of time that we can provide for these projects based on financial guidelines here at OJP, so you’re 

also encouraged to review the financial guide. And just additionally, with regard to funding, we have the 

discretion depending on priorities and funding availability to make supplements later, over the course of 

the project, it’s not a guarantee. But we do have some options available, and that is mentioned in the 

solicitation as well.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Where are past and currently funded reentry grants posted?
xii

MARIE GARCIA: When you go on to our website, nij.gov, go onto our funding page and look at “Expired 

Opportunities,” and you click on Reentry, all of our reentry solicitations that we funded in the past two 

years will be available to you and you can see the 10 projects that we’ve funded. And if you have any 

trouble finding that, please do contact NCJRS and we can send you the link directly.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: All right. Is there a recommended maximum amount that would be more attracted 

to the funder of the RSP?

MARIE GARCIA: As I just mentioned, we have six million dollars available. So you should absolutely not go 

over the six-million-dollar cap, because that is what we have assigned to this. We cannot tell you what’s 

attractive to us or what’s not. The best advice that we can give you is to make sure that your expenses 

align with your budget and the overall project. That’s the best advice that we can give you. If your project 

would need funding over time, down the road, if funded, we could perhaps give you a supplement, but you 

want to make sure that your costs align with your project goals.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Would the proposed intervention to decrease community healthcare costs and 

lower transmission of HIV, without specifically changing recidivism, be of interest?

ERIC MARTIN: Reentry takes many forms. I promise I’m going to answer the question; I don’t want to just 

spout on reentry. As you’ve seen in the presentation, we’ve funded a number of different aspects of 

criminal justice agencies and third-party providers working with offenders to improve their pro-social 

outcomes. But that said, the main outcome of interest we’re looking for, for this solicitation, is recidivism.

So I strongly encourage any applicant to really see how their program they’re evaluating is going to reduce 

recidivism and make sure that’s clear in the proposal. Some aspects of reentry have a more obvious 

connection to recidivism than others. But that logic model of how the program is intervening in the 

offender and how the research design is capturing all those aspects of the program should clearly connect 

for the reader: How is that program going to reduce recidivism?

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Our organization is a developer and implementer of reentry programs in rural 

areas. Given that we are not focused on research, does that preclude our eligibility for this grant? Or could 

we find a research partner to join us on the submission?

MARIE GARCIA: You could absolutely find a research partner for this RSP. For instance, if you wanted to 

implement a particular program that you’ve developed, you could partner or subcontract or, depending on 

how you would want to make your grant, you could have a partner to evaluate your program. That would 

absolutely be appropriate for this solicitation.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We apologize if we were not able to get to all your questions, but please know 

that NCJRS is there to assist you. The National Criminal Justice Reference Service: You can call them at 1-

800-851-3420 or email your question to them at, Grants@ncjrs.gov, and they also have a web chat feature.

In addition, if you go to their website, you could sign up to receive their bi-weekly JUSTINFO, as well as 

their weekly Funding Newsletter. I stress the weekly Funding Newsletter because it does announce new 

funding opportunities offered through the Office of Justice Programs, which opportunities will have 

webinars, and they’ll also let you know when the PowerPoint and slides and so forth have been posted for 

a particular webinar, so it’s a great way to keep on top of what’s going on at OJP. 
xiii

As Marie mentioned, the due date is May 5th. It is strongly recommended that you submit your proposals 

at least 72 hours in advance, in case there are any difficulties or issues. You can contact grants.gov with any 

technical problem. And you can actually find the grants.gov information as well as NCJRS’ information on 

page two of your solicitation, so even after the webinar, if you haven’t had a chance to write that down, 

you can have access to it. As a reminder, the PowerPoint, as well as the transcript for today’s presentation,

will be attached to the solicitation. Again, any questions that were not answered: Send them to NCJRS and 

they will work with Marie and Eric to get you an answer.

MARIE GARCIA: Thank you very much for attending, and we look forward to receiving your applications.

ERIC MARTIN: Thank you.