Notice Regarding the solicitation “Graduate Research Fellowship in

Social and Behavioral Sciences” 

March 12, 2018: Links directing to "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to 

OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2017 Awards" have been updated to the FY 

2018 link throughout this funding opportunity document.

February 15, 2018: NIJ-hosted a webinar to discussion on February 1, 2018. The transcripts 

and slides from the webinar have been added to the end of this document. 

February 15, 2018: OJP has combined the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative in a 

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

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

Worksheet and where it can be accessed. 

January 17, 2018: Budget language has been modified and updated language will be provided 

as an addendum at a later date. 

The original solicitation document begins on the next page. 
OMB No. 1121-0329

Approval Expires 11/30/2020

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

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

Justice (NIJ) is seeking applications for funding of innovative doctoral dissertation research in 

the social and behavioral sciences that is relevant to supporting crime reduction, enhancing 

investigations and prosecutions, protecting police officers and other public safety personnel, 

combating the opioid epidemic, victimization, and addressing illegal immigration in the United 

States. This program furthers the Department’s mission by sponsoring research to provide 

objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime 

and criminal justice, particularly at the state, local, and tribal levels. 

Graduate Research Fellowship in Social and 

Behavioral Sciences

Applications Due: March 12, 2018

Eligibility

Eligible applicants are limited to degree-granting academic institutions (including tribal 

institutions of higher education) in the United States and its territories. To be eligible, the 

institution must be fully accredited by one of the regional institutional accreditation agencies 

recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education. Under this solicitation, the applicant institution 

must apply as the sponsoring institution for the doctoral candidate conducting criminal justicerelated research in a discipline relevant to NIJ’s mission. An institution may submit more than 

one application.

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

management fee.

An applicant may submit more than one application under this solicitation, but each application 

must propose sponsoring a different doctoral candidate’s dissertation research.

Deadline

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

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

March 12, 2018. 

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 
 NIJ-2018-13640

2

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

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

problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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

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

Information. 

Contact Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

application. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears under Experiencing 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Grants.gov number assigned to this solicitation: NIJ-2018-13640

[Release date: January 11, 2018] 
 NIJ-2018-13640

3

Contents

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

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

Program-Specific Information ................................................................................................. 5

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products ........................................ 8

B. Federal Award Information....................................................................................................10

Type of Award .......................................................................................................................10

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls........................................................11

Budget Information ................................................................................................................12

Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement.................................................................................12

Pre-agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs) .......................................................12

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver...............................12

Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...................13

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)...................................................13

C. Eligibility Information.............................................................................................................13

D. Application and Submission Information...............................................................................13

What an Application Should Include ......................................................................................13

How to Apply .........................................................................................................................28

E. Application Review Information.............................................................................................31

Review Criteria ......................................................................................................................31

Review Process.....................................................................................................................33

F. Federal Award Administration Information ............................................................................35

Federal Award Notices ..........................................................................................................35

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements ............................................35

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements..............................35

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...................................................................................36

H. Other Information..................................................................................................................36

Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) ....................36

Provide Feedback to OJP......................................................................................................37

Application Checklist .............................................................................................................38
 NIJ-2018-13640

4

Graduate Research Fellowship in Social and 

Behavioral Sciences

(CFDA # 16.562)

A. Program Description

Overview

The NIJ Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF) Program in Social and Behavioral Sciences is 

open to doctoral students in all social and behavioral science disciplines. This program provides 

awards to accredited academic institutions to support graduate research leading to doctoral 

degrees in areas that are relevant to ensuring public safety, preventing and controlling crime, 

and ensuring the effective administration of criminal justice in the United States. Of particular 

interest is research on issues deemed critical by the U.S. Department of Justice:

• Violent crime reduction

• Enhancing investigations and prosecutions

• Protecting police officers and other public safety personnel

• Combating the opioid epidemic

• Victimization

• Addressing illegal immigration.

NIJ invests in doctoral education by supporting universities that sponsor students who 

demonstrate the potential to successfully complete doctoral degree programs in disciplines 

relevant to the mission of NIJ, and who are in the final stages of graduate study. Applicants 

sponsoring doctoral students are eligible to apply only if: 

1. The doctoral student’s degree program is in a social and behavioral science discipline; 

and 

2. The student’s proposed dissertation research has demonstrable implications for 

addressing the challenges of public safety, crime, and/or the fair and impartial 

administration of criminal justice in the United States. 

To learn more about NIJ’s Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF) Program in Social and 

Behavioral Sciences, see http://www.nij.gov/GRF-SBS.

Academic institutions sponsoring doctoral students whose disciplines are outside the social and 

behavioral sciences will not be considered under this solicitation. Applicants sponsoring 

doctoral students whose research is in the areas of science, technology, engineering, or 

mathematics (STEM) should submit applications under NIJ’s “Graduate Research Fellowship 

Program in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics” (GRF-STEM) solicitation. 
 NIJ-2018-13640

5

Awards are anticipated to be made to successful applicant institutions in the form of a grant to 

cover a fellowship for the sponsored doctoral student. Awards in the amount of $32,000 will be 

made under this solicitation. Award funds should be used to cover all allowable expenses over 

the project period. Additional funds will not be provided. Final award decisions will be made by 

the Director of the National Institute of Justice. 

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

authority provided by a full-year appropriations act for FY 2018. As of the writing of this 

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

no full-year appropriation for the Department has been enacted for FY 2018.

Program-Specific Information

NIJ’s Graduate Research Fellowship Program in Social and Behavioral Sciences is open to 

doctoral students in all social and behavioral science disciplines. To learn more about the 

program, see http://www.nij.gov/GRF-SBS. 

Degree-granting educational institutions are encouraged to sponsor outstanding and promising 

doctoral students whose dissertation research has direct implications for ensuring public safety, 

preventing and controlling crime, and ensuring the fair and impartial administration of criminal 

justice in the United States.

Successful applicants must clearly demonstrate how the proposed dissertation research will 

advance criminal justice practice and/or policy in the United States and addresses issues 

deemed critical by the U.S. Department of Justice (see above). The proposal must demonstrate 

strong support from the dissertation chair in the development, review, and submission of the 

proposal as well as the execution of the proposed work.

Quantitative, qualitative, primary, and secondary data analysis and mixed-methods approach 

research studies are encouraged. Special consideration will be given to applications that 

demonstrate that the most rigorous research methods applicable to the proposed research topic 

will be used to maximize the validity and reliability of the findings. 

NIJ encourages the resubmission of proposals that have addressed previous peer review 

comments. Please see page 16 for more details on the information to be included with a 

resubmission.

Applicant Information 

The applicant under this solicitation will be a degree-granting academic institution in the United 

States or its territories. To be eligible, the academic institution of record must be fully accredited 

by one of the regional institutional accreditation agencies recognized by the U.S. Secretary of 

Education. An applicant institution sponsoring a doctoral student is eligible to apply only if the 

doctoral student satisfies the Doctoral Student Eligibility Requirements. Applications from 

students who apply as individuals will be removed from consideration. 

The academic institution’s institution-wide research office (e.g., office of sponsored research) 

must complete and submit an application electronically using Grants.gov (see What an 

Application Should Include). If allowed by the applicant institution, the sponsored doctoral 

student should be identified as the project’s principal investigator.
 NIJ-2018-13640

6

The applicant must demonstrate that the sponsored graduate student is enrolled in a qualifying 

doctoral degree program at the time of application. This should take the form of a document 

from the Office of the Registrar, or an equivalent university- or college-wide office with the 

authority to verify status. A transcript may be accepted if it clearly indicates the student’s current 

full-time enrollment in the qualifying doctoral degree program.

Doctoral Student Eligibility Requirements 

The graduate student must: 

1. Be enrolled full-time in a doctoral degree program in a social and behavioral sciences 

discipline at the eligible academic institution; and

2. Propose a dissertation research topic that is relevant to addressing the challenges of 

public safety, crime, and/or the fair and impartial administration of criminal justice in the 

United States (see What an Application Should Include). 

There are three requirements for the NIJ Graduate Research Fellowship Program that must be 

completed before an award can be made. It is not necessary for the student to have completed 

the three requirements listed below at the time of the application due date: 

1. The doctoral student must have completed all required course work. 

2. The doctoral student must have passed qualifying comprehensive exams. 

3. The doctoral student must be advanced to candidacy by the university. 

The doctoral student need not have a dissertation committee at the time the application is 

submitted, nor is it necessary for the student’s dissertation topic to have been accepted by the 

committee. However, if the application is selected for award, grant funds will be withheld until 

the applicant academic institution submits proof that the student’s dissertation topic has been 

accepted by the committee, and that it is substantively the same as that proposed in the 

application. 

If the doctoral student has an approved topic at the time of application, then it should be noted 

in a statement of support from the doctoral student’s dissertation committee chair (see 

Dissertation Committee Chair Requirements). If the doctoral student’s topic has not been 

approved at the time of application, then the expected dates by which the doctoral student will 

meet this requirement should be indicated in the project timeline (see “Proposed project timeline 

and expected milestones” under Appendices). In addition, the doctoral student’s faculty advisor, 

department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or an individual with similar 

responsibilities must submit a statement of support at the time of application. That statement of 

support should generally follow the outline provided below for the statement of support from the 

dissertation committee chair, including all relevant elements.

Even though an award may be made, access to award funds will be withheld until the required 

documentation is received and approved by the NIJ Program Office. NIJ anticipates that award 

notifications will be made on or before September 30, 2018. The applicant academic institution

and the doctoral student are cautioned not to anticipate the availability of fellowship funds for 

meeting any necessary or required expenses until the requirements stipulated above have been 
 NIJ-2018-13640

7

met in full. Awarded applicants may receive fellowship funding to support only a doctoral student 

who is actively enrolled in the doctoral degree program and actively carrying out the research 

for the dissertation identified in the funding application.

Applicants whose doctoral students have completed the three requirements are encouraged to 

provide documentation of such completion in the application. Applicants whose doctoral 

students have not completed these requirements by the solicitation application deadline are 

encouraged to apply but should indicate, in the project timeline, the dates by which the 

sponsored doctoral student is expected to complete the three requirements under this section. 

The timeline should also provide details of other project milestones, including but not limited to: 

the expected timing of the dissertation prospectus defense, the writing of the dissertation, and 

an expected dissertation defense date. The project timeline also should include time to 

complete edits to the dissertation and time for submission of the final dissertation to NIJ.

Human subjects protection paperwork including Institutional Review Board (IRB) documentation 

and a completed privacy certificate are not required at the time of application. If awarded, 

and if applicable, funds will be withheld until submission and NIJ approval of any required 

Human Subjects Protection paperwork and/or a completed Privacy Certificate. The Privacy 

Certificate must be signed by the academic institution’s IRB chair. For information on NIJ’s 

Human Subjects and Privacy Protection requirements, see 

http://www.nij.gov/nij/funding/humansubjects/welcome.htm. 

Dissertation Committee Chair Requirements

Although a fellowship may be awarded based on consideration of a letter of support from the 

faculty advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or individual with 

similar responsibilities, the NIJ Program Office must receive a statement of support from the 

sponsored doctoral student’s dissertation committee chair prior to authorizing the disbursement 

of award funds (applicants can expect to see conditions to that effect attached to any such 

award). If the dissertation committee has accepted the student’s topic at the time of application, 

that statement of support must be submitted as part of the application. If the topic has not been 

accepted by the time of application, it must be submitted as soon as is reasonable after the 

topic has been approved. The approved dissertation topic must remain substantively similar to 

that initially proposed. 

The statement of support should:

• Evaluate the doctoral student’s proposed project. 

• Describe the current status of the proposed work. 

• Outline any other outstanding work, academic or otherwise, toward completion of the 

degree. 

• Verify the date on which the dissertation research project is expected to be ready to 

begin. 

• Comment on the student’s potential to complete the dissertation successfully. 

• Indicate that the doctoral student has the full support of the dissertation committee. 
 NIJ-2018-13640

8

• Describe the dissertation committee chair’s role in monitoring the project and present 

evidence of both the department’s and the dissertation committee chair’s abilities to 

mentor doctoral candidates through the completion of their degrees. 

• Verify that the dissertation committee chair will review and approve all progress reports 

prior to their submission to NIJ. 

An application that does not include the statement of support from (1) the dissertation 

committee chair; or (2) the doctoral student’s faculty advisor, department chair, 

departmental director of graduate studies, or individual with similar responsibilities will 

be removed from consideration.

For information on application elements designated as critical by NIJ under this solicitation, see 

page 13.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

The ultimate goal of this solicitation is to increase the pool of researchers in the social and 

behavioral sciences that are involved in research relevant to problems that affect criminal justice 

policy and practice in the United States, particularly addressing issues deemed critical by the 

U.S. Department of Justice (see above). Through the GRF program in the Social and Behavioral 

Sciences, NIJ supports graduate education by investing in academic institutions that support 

outstanding and promising doctoral students. 

Recipients of awards made under this solicitation will be required to deliver bi-annual and final 

progress reports, and quarterly financial reports to NIJ by specified deadlines.

The final deliverables for awards under this solicitation are:

• An official signed copy of the doctoral student’s dissertation. 

• A list of scholarly products and products developed for broad dissemination to informal 

audiences resulting from the dissertation research. 

Upon submission, the dissertation may be archived at the National Criminal Justice Reference 

Service (NCJRS). Doctoral students who participate in the GRF program are encouraged but 

are not required to archive their dissertation data.

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

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

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

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

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

inventions, or similar scientific products.

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

performance measures that demonstrate the results of the work completed. Applicants should 

visit OJP’s Current Funding Opportunities page at 

https://ojp.gov/funding/Explore/CurrentFundingOpportunities.htm to view the specific reporting 

requirements for this grant program.
 NIJ-2018-13640

9

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 to 

view the specific reporting requirements for this grant program.

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 

agency-approved modifications to 

the scope.

2. Quality of the research as 

demonstrated by the scholarly 

products that result in whole or in 

part from work funded under the 

NIJ award, such as published, 

peer-reviewed, scientific journal 

articles, and/or (as appropriate for 

the funded project) law review 

journal articles, book chapter(s) or 

book(s) in the academic press, 

technological prototypes, 

patented inventions, or similar 

scientific products.

3. Quality of management as 

measured by such factors as 

whether significant project 

milestones were achieved, 

reporting and other deadlines 

were met, and costs remained 

within approved limits.

1. Quarterly financial reports, 

semi-annual and final progress 

reports, and products of the 

work performed under the NIJ 

award (including, at minimum, a 

final research report).

If applicable, an annual audit 

report

2. List of citation(s) to all 

scholarly products that resulted 

in whole or in part from work 

funded under the NIJ award.

3. An official signed copy of the 

doctoral student’s dissertation.
 NIJ-2018-13640

10

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.

B. Federal Award Information

NIJ expects to make up to 10 awards with an estimated total amount awarded of up to 

$320,000. NIJ will not supplement awards with additional funding, but no-cost extensions may 

be granted on a case-by-case basis, for project delays.

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, 2019.

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

additional requirements that may be imposed by law.

Type of Award

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

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

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

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

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

DOJ regulations on confidentiality and protection of human subjects. See “Requirements related 
 NIJ-2018-13640

11

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

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

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

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

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

entities1

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

200.303:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

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

Federal awards.

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

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

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

noncompliance identified in audit findings.

(e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable

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

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

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

privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

To help ensure that applicants understand applicable administrative requirements and cost 

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

Financial Management Online Training, available at https://ojpfgm.webfirst.com/. (This training 

is required for all OJP recipients.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.
 NIJ-2018-13640

12

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 for dissertation research by doctoral students who are not pursuing 

research related to public safety, crime, and/or the fair and impartial administration of 

criminal justice in the United States.

• Applications that are not responsive to this specific solicitation.

Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement

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

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

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

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

performance of the federal award. Requests for approval of pre-agreement costs will not be 

considered under this solicitation. 

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

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

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

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

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

agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year3

. The 2018 salary 

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

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salarytables/18Tables/exec/html/ES.aspx. Note: A recipient may compensate an employee at a 

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

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

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

the percentage of time worked times the maximum salary limitation. 

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

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

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

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

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

budget.

 

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

2 C.F.R. Part 200.
 NIJ-2018-13640

13

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

all food and beverage costs.

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

services, where appropriate.

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

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

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

C. Eligibility Information

For eligibility information, see title page.

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

Include” in Section D. Application and Submission Information.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

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

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

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

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

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

funds available. 

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

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

application elements that NIJ has designated to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review
 NIJ-2018-13640

14

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

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

resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel, bibliography/references, project timeline, and a 

statement of support from the dissertation committee chair or, as appropriate, the doctoral 

student’s faculty advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or an 

individual with similar responsibilities. 

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

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

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

where it can be accessed.

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

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

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

applicants include resumes in a single file. 

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

applications are submitted in permitted formats.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

applying under this solicitation.

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

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

SF-424. A new applicant entity should attach official legal documents to their applications 

(e.g., articles of incorporation, 501(c)(3) status documentation, organizational letterhead

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

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

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

the SF-424 matches its current registration in SAM. See the How to Apply section for more 

information on SAM and DUNS numbers.

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

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

selecting the response that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.”)
 NIJ-2018-13640

15

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. 

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

project in 250-400 words. Project abstracts not submitted in the template below should be—

• Written for a general public audience.

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

• Single-spaced, using the form’s standard 12-point font (with 1-inch margins).

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

program narrative. 

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

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

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 15 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 15-page limit for the narrative 

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

count toward the 15-page limit.

If the program narrative fails to comply with these length-related restrictions, NIJ may 

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

The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative.4

Program Narrative Guidelines: 

a. Title Page (not counted against the 15-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 academic 

institution and the principal investigator (i.e., the sponsored doctoral student, if 

allowed by the academic institution).

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

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

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

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

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

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

Information,” above.
 NIJ-2018-13640

16

b. Resubmit Response (if applicable) (not counted against the 15-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 NIJassigned application number 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 15-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 program-specific 

information [page 5] and a plan for dissemination to appropriate audiences. 

Applicants should identify plans to produce or make available to broader 
 NIJ-2018-13640

17

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. If applicable, a description contextualizing the proposed doctoral 

work relative to, or within, any other work being conducted under an existing NIJ 

award, which must be specifically identified. Applicants should address:

• Experience and capacity to work with the proposed data sources in the 

conduct of similar research efforts.

• Experience and capacity to design and implement rigorous research and 

data analysis projects.

• 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 15-page program narrative limit) include:

• Bibliography/references

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

pertaining to the proposed project that are supplemental to such items 

included in the main body of the narrative

• Curriculum vitae or resumes of the doctoral student and the dissertation 

committee chair. If the applicant does not have a dissertation committee 

chair, a curriculum vitae or resume from the faculty advisor, department chair, 

departmental director of graduate studies, or individual with similar 

responsibilities that submitted a letter of support

• Personal statement from the student discussing his or her academic 

background, research experience, career goals, and the anticipated role of 

the fellowship in his or her professional trajectory, not to exceed two (2)

double-spaced pages in 12-point font with 1-inch margins

• List of the student’s dissertation committee (if known) and their contact 

information to include: names, telephone numbers, and email addresses. The 

dissertation chair should be clearly identified. Applicants should use the 

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

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

this listing 
 NIJ-2018-13640

18

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

such conflicts on the part of prospective reviewers of the application), a 

complete list of the individuals named or otherwise identified anywhere in the 

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

may work (or advise or consult) on the proposed research, development, or 

evaluation project. This applies to all such individuals, including, for example, 

individuals who are or would be employees of the applicant or employees of 

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

subrecipient, and individuals who may (or will) work without compensation 

(such as advisory board members). This appendix to the program narrative is 

to include, for each listed individual: name, title, employer, any other 

potentially-pertinent organizational affiliation(s), and the individual's proposed 

roles and responsibilities in carrying out the proposed project. If the 

application identifies any specific entities or organizations (other than the 

applicant) that will or may work (or advise or consult) on the proposed project, 

without also naming any associated individuals, the name of each such 

organization also should be included on this list. Applicants should use the 

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

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

this list.

If the application (including the budget) identifies any proposed noncompetitive 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."

For information on distinctions -- for purposes of federal grants administrative 

requirements -- between subawards and procurement contracts under 

awards, see “Budget and Associated Documentation,” below.

• Proposed project timeline and expected milestones

• Human Subjects Protection paperwork (documentation and forms related to 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) review). (See

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

approval is not required at the time an application is submitted.

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to

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

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

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

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

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

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

above, for definition of “scholarly products.”)
 NIJ-2018-13640

19

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

application has been submitted including, but not limited to, other fellowships 

which the doctoral student has received and the dates during which those 

fellowships will be active (if applicable). 

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

research project design, must submit an incentive or stipend approval 

request, as a separate document, according to the requirements set forth at 

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

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and 

correctional agencies (if applicable)

4. Budget and Associated Documentation

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

collectively referred to as the Budget Detail Worksheet. The Budget Detail Worksheet is a userfriendly, fillable, Microsoft Excel-based document designed to calculate totals. Additionally, the 

Excel workbook contains worksheets for multiple budget years that can be completed as 

necessary. All applicants should use the Excel version when completing the proposed 

budget in an application, except in cases where the applicant does not have access to 

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

Microsoft Excel or experiences technical difficulties with the Excel version, then the applicant 

should use the 508-compliant accessible Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) version.

Both versions of the Budget Detail Worksheet can be accessed at 

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

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

b. Budget Narrative

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

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

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

activities).

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

effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost 

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

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

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

used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.
 NIJ-2018-13640

20

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

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

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

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

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

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

The following are sample budget narrative descriptions of relevant cost items that might 

be used by an applicant:

Salaries and Wages – Personnel

The Principal Investigator (i.e., the doctoral student), Mr./Ms. xxx, will devote xxx 

summer months and xxx academic months per year toward the project. One summer 

month effort is equivalent to xxx hours. One academic month effort is equivalent to 

xxx hours. Therefore, the salary paid to Mr./Ms. xxx in each academic month will be 

xxx, and in each summer month will be xxx. (Note that if a stipend will be allocated in 

equal disbursements each month, please provide such a description with the 

corresponding monthly breakdown.)

The fringe benefit rate during the academic year for the graduate student is ___%. 

The summer fringe benefit rate is ___%. The benefits included in the rate cover 

__________.

Travel (Non-federal)

Attendance at the xxx Annual Meeting will provide an opportunity to disseminate the 

results of my work within the relevant academic community. The meeting will be held 

in xxx. The expected lodging rate is $xxx, based on xxx source, for a total of xxx 

nights ($xxx total). The meal allowance is $xxx per day, based on xxx source. (Note 

that whether the appropriate source is the federal per diem rate or a lower rate 

stipulated by the academic institution is at the institution’s discretion.) The expected 

transportation cost is $xxx, based on xxx source. Other anticipated costs include an 

anticipated baggage fee of $xx. The total requested funding for this travel event is 

$xxx.

c. Cofunding

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

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

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

The application should identify generally any such contributions that the applicant 

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

will be supported with non-federal contributions.

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

under Section B. Federal Award Information. 
 NIJ-2018-13640

21

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

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

mandatory and subject to audit.

d. Information on Proposed Subawards (if any), as well as on Proposed Procurement 

Contracts (if any)

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

may propose to enter into procurement contracts under the award. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

applies.

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

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

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

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

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

Toolkit for OJP Recipients.

• Checklist to Determine Subrecipient or Contractor Classification.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

entity.
 NIJ-2018-13640

22

1. Information on proposed subawards

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

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

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

authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(2) describe in detail what each subrecipient will do to carry out the federal award and 

federal program, and (3) provide a justification for the subaward(s), with details on 

pertinent matters such as special qualifications and areas of expertise. Pertinent 

information on subawards should appear not only in the Program Narrative, but also in 

the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative. 

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

proposed noncompetitive contracts over $150,000)

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

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

purposes of federal grants administrative requirements -- is considered a procurement 

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

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

Procurement Standards of the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements (as set out at 2 

C.F.R. 200.317 - 200.326). The Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative should 

identify proposed procurement contracts. (As discussed above, subawards must be 

identified and described separately from procurement contracts.) 

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

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

requirements) constitute procurement “contracts” under awards will be entered into on 

the basis of full and open competition. All noncompetitive (sole source) procurement 

contracts must meet the OJP requirements outlined at 

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

would exceed the simplified acquisition threshold -- currently, $150,000 -- a recipient of 

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

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

the procurement. An applicant that (at the time of its application) intends – without 

competition – to enter into a procurement contract that would exceed $150,000 should 

include a detailed justification that explains to OJP why, in the particular circumstances, 

it is appropriate to proceed without competition.

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

Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently $150,000) must have written justification for 
 NIJ-2018-13640

23

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

procurement file does not have the documentation that meets the criteria outlined in 2 

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

procurement over the $150,000 Simplified Acquisition Threshold must have prior 

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

documentation justifying the noncompetitive procurement must be submitted with the 

GAN and maintained in the procurement file.

e. Pre-Agreement Costs

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

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if:

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

or

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

categories.

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

please contact the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Customer Service Center at 

1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, an 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.) For additional eligibility requirements please see 

Part 200 Uniform Requirements, as set out at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?node=se2.1.200_1414&rgn=div8

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

applicant disclosure of high-risk status)

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

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

Internal Controls Questionnaire (Questionnaire) at 
 NIJ-2018-13640

24

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

The Questionnaire helps OJP assess the financial management and internal control 

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

assessment process.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• The date the applicant was designated high risk.

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

and email address).

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

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

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

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

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

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

document).

7. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

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

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

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) posted at

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

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

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

8. Additional Attachments
 NIJ-2018-13640

25

SAMPLE

a. Statement of support from the dissertation committee chair or the doctoral student’s 

faculty advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or individual 

with similar responsibilities, as applicable (REQUIRED). (For information on required 

content, see page 7.)

b. Certification of full-time enrollment in a social and behavioral sciences doctoral program 

at the time of application (REQUIRED). (See page 6 for details).

c. Applicant disclosure of pending applications5

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(“subgrant”) federal funds).

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

multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement comprehensive 

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

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

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

months:

• The federal or State funding agency

• The solicitation name/project name

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

 

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

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

Federal or State 

Funding Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project Name

Name/Phone/E-mail for Point of 

Contact at Federal or State Funding 

Agency

DOJ/Office of 

Community Oriented 

Policing Services 

(COPS)

COPS Hiring 

Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; 

jane.doe@usdoj.gov

Health and Human 

Services/ Substance 

Abuse and Mental 

Health Services 

Administration

Drug-Free 

Communities 

Mentoring 

Program/North 

County Youth 

Mentoring Program

John Doe, 202/000-0000; 

john.doe@hhs.gov
 NIJ-2018-13640

26

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

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

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

applications statement.

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

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

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

cooperative agreements or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative 

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

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

submitted as part of this application.”

d. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

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

evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and 

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

applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed 

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

Each application should include an attachment that addresses both i. and ii. below.

i. For purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to document research and 

evaluation independence and integrity by including one of the following two items:

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

any actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (including through review 

of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co-principal 

investigators, and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no 

such conflicts of interest – whether personal or financial or organizational 

(including on the part of the applicant entity or on the part of staff, 

investigators, or subrecipients) – that could affect the independence or 

integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, and reporting of the 

research.

OR

b. A specific description of actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest that 

the applicant has identified – including through review of pertinent information 

on the principal investigator, any co-principal investigators, and any 

subrecipients – that could affect the independence or integrity of the 

research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research. These 

conflicts may be personal (e.g., on the part of investigators or other staff), 

financial, or organizational (related to the applicant or any subrecipient entity). 

Some examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations 

are those in which an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a 

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

position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague (potential 

apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, 
 NIJ-2018-13640

27

as one example, generally an organization would not be given an award to 

evaluate a project, if that organization had itself provided substantial prior 

technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the 

project (whether funded by OJP or other sources), because the organization 

in such an instance might appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own 

prior work. The key is whether a reasonable person understanding all of the 

facts would be able to have confidence that the results of any research or 

evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial 

interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or 

research product is a problem and must be disclosed.

ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to address possible 

mitigation of research integrity concerns by including, at a minimum, one of the 

following two items:

a. If an applicant reasonably believes that no actual or potential apparent 

conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) exist, then the 

applicant should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it 

reached that conclusion. The applicant also is to include an explanation of the 

specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put 

in place, to identify and prevent (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such 

conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of 

performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include 

organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, 

personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the 

plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed.

OR

b. If the applicant has identified actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest 

(personal, financial, or organizational) that could affect the independence and 

integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the 

research, the applicant is to provide a specific and robust mitigation plan to 

address each of those conflicts. At a minimum, the applicant is expected to 

explain the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place,

or will put in place, to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) 

any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period 

of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may 

include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding 

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

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

OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on 

considerations such as the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify factors that 

could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the applicant entity 

(and any subrecipients) in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation 

activity; and the adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed remedies to control 

any such factors.
 NIJ-2018-13640

28

How to Apply

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

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

register and submit an application at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html.

Applicants that experience technical difficulties during this process should call the Grants.gov 

Customer Support Hotline at 800-518-4726 or 606–545–5035, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 

days a week, except on federal holidays.

Important Grants.gov update. Grants.gov has updated its application tool. The legacy PDF 

application package is being phased out and will be retired on December 31, 2017. Grants.gov 

Workspace is now the standard application method for applying for grants. OJP applicants 

should familiarize themselves with the Workspace option now. For complete information and 

instructions on using Workspace (and other changes), go to the Workspace Overview page at 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspace-overview.html.

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

and it can take several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation of registration 

and a user password. OJP encourages applicants to register several weeks before the 

application submission deadline. In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications at 

least 72 hours prior to the application due date, in order to allow time for the applicant to receive 

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

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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

regarding this solicitation at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/manage-subscriptions.html. If 

this solicitation is cancelled or modified, individuals who sign up with Grants.gov for updates will 

be automatically notified.

Browser Information: Grants.gov was built to be compatible with Internet Explorer. For 

technical assistance with Google Chrome, or another browser, contact Grants.gov Customer 

Support.

Note on Attachments. Grants.gov has two categories of files for attachments: “mandatory” and 

“optional.” OJP receives all files attached in both categories. Attachments are also labeled to 

describe the file being attached (e.g., Project Narrative, Budget Narrative, Other, etc.) Please 

ensure that all required documents are attached in the correct Grants.gov category and are 

labeled correctly. Do not embed “mandatory” attachments within another file.

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

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

in the table below. Grants.gov rejects any application that includes an attachment(s) with a file 

name that contains any characters not shown in the table below. Grants.gov forwards 

successfully-submitted applications to the OJP Grants Management System (GMS).
 NIJ-2018-13640

29

Characters

Upper case (A – Z)

Lower case (a – z)

Underscore (__)

Hyphen ( - )

Space

Period (.)

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

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

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

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

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

the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 

Unique Entity Identifier (DUNS Number) and System for Award Management (SAM)

Every applicant entity must comply with all applicable System for Award Management (SAM) 

and unique entity identifier (currently, a Data Universal Numbering System [DUNS] number) 

requirements. SAM is the repository for certain standard information about federal financial 

assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit 

identification number provided by the commercial company Dun and Bradstreet. More detailed 

information about SAM and the DUNS number is in the numbered sections below.

If an applicant entity has not fully complied with the applicable SAM and unique identifier 

requirements by the time OJP makes award decisions, OJP may determine that the applicant is 

not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for making the 

award to a different applicant.

Registration and Submission Steps

1. Acquire a unique entity identifier (currently, a DUNS number). In general, the Office of 

Management and Budget requires every applicant for a federal award (other than an 

individual) to include a "unique entity identifier" in each application, including an application 

for a supplemental award. Currently, a DUNS number is the required unique entity identifier.

This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and to validate address and point 

of contact information for applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. It will be used throughout 

the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Call 

Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a DUNS number or apply online at 

https://www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 1-2 business days.

2. Acquire or maintain registration with SAM. All applicants for OJP awards (other than 

individuals) must maintain current registrations in the SAM database. Applicants will need 

the authorizing official of the organization and an Employer Identification Number (EIN). An 

applicant must be registered in SAM to successfully register in Grants.gov. Each applicant 

must update or renew its SAM registration at least annually to maintain an active status. 

SAM registration and renewal can take as long as 10 business days to complete (2 more 

weeks to acquire an EIN).

Special Characters Special Characters Special Characters

Parenthesis ( ) Curly braces { } Square brackets [ ]

Ampersand (&)* Tilde (~) Exclamation point (!)

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

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

Percent sign (%) Plus sign (+) Equal sign (=)
 NIJ-2018-13640

30

An application cannot be successfully submitted in Grants.gov until Grants.gov receives the 

SAM registration information. Once the SAM registration/renewal is complete, the 

information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take as long as 48 hours. OJP 

recommends that the applicant register or renew registration with SAM as early as possible.

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

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

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

and password. An applicant entity’s "unique entity identifier" (DUNS number) must be used 

to complete this step. For more information about the registration process for organizations 

and other entities, go to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organizationregistration.html.

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

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

applicant organization’s AOR. The E-Biz POC will need the Marketing Partner Identification 

Number (MPIN) password obtained when registering with SAM to complete this step. Note 

that an organization can have more than one AOR.

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

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

Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for this solicitation is 16.562; and the funding 

opportunity number is NIJ-2018-13640. 

6. Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package from Grants.gov. After 

finding and selecting this funding opportunity, choose the desired download option by 

selecting “Apply Now Using Workspace” or “Download the Legacy Application Package.”

Keep in mind that Grants.gov is phasing out the option to download the legacy PDF 

application package, and it will not be available for use after December 31, 2017. After this 

date, applicants must use Grants.gov Workspace. Enter your email address to be notified of 

any changes to the opportunity package before the closing date.

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

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

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

application. The second will state whether the application has been validated and 

successfully submitted, or whether it has been rejected due to errors, with an explanation. It 

is possible to first receive a message indicating that the application is received, and then 

receive a rejection notice a few minutes or hours later. Submitting an application well ahead 

of the deadline provides time to correct the problem(s) that caused the rejection. Important:

OJP urges each applicant to submit its application at least 72 hours prior to the application 

due date, to allow time to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from 

Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a 

rejection notification. Applications must be successfully submitted through Grants.gov by 

11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 12, 2018.

Click https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/organization-registration.html for further 

details on DUNS numbers, SAM, and Grants.gov registration steps and timeframes.
 NIJ-2018-13640

31

Note: Application Versions

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

recent system-validated version submitted. 

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

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

prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline must contact the Grants.gov Customer 

Support Hotline at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html or the SAM Help Desk

(Federal Service Desk) at https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/home.do to report the technical issue and 

receive a tracking number. The applicant must e-mail the NIJ contact identified in the Contact 

Information section on the title page within 24 hours after the application deadline to request 

approval to submit its application after the deadline. The applicant’s e-mail must describe the 

technical difficulties, and must include a timeline of the applicant’s submission efforts, the 

complete grant application, the applicant’s DUNS number, and any Grants.gov Help Desk or 

SAM tracking number(s).

Note: OJP does not automatically approve requests to submit a late application. After 

OJP reviews the applicant’s request, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to verify 

the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late 

application has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application 

submission was due to the applicant’s failure to follow all required procedures, OJP will deny the 

applicant’s request to submit its application.

The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions:

• Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time (SAM registration and renewal 

can take as long as 10 business days to complete. The information transfer from SAM to 

Grants.gov can take up to 48 hours.)

• Failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its 

website

• Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation

• Technical issues with the applicant’s computer or information technology environment, 

such as issues with firewalls or browser incompatibility

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

the top of the OJP Funding Resource Center at https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm.

E. Application Review Information

Review Criteria

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

the following review criteria. Each individual criterion is assigned a different weight based on the 

percentage value listed. For example, the first criterion, Statement of the Problem, is worth 20 

percent of the score in the assessment of the application’s technical merit.

Statement of the Problem and Research Questions (Understanding of the problem, research 

questions, and their importance) – 20% 
 NIJ-2018-13640

32

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 – 20% 

Potential for a significant scientific or technical advance(s) that will improve criminal/juvenile

justice in the United States, such as:

• Potential for significantly improved understanding of the stated criminal/juvenile justice 

problem.

• Potential for innovative solution to address (all or a significant part of) the stated 

criminal/juvenile justice problem.

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

applicant organization and proposed project staff) – 10%

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (that is, the principal investigator, 

any and all co-principal investigators, and all other individuals (and organizations)

identified in the application (regardless of “investigator” status) who will be significantly 

involved in substantive aspects of the proposed project).

2. Demonstrated ability of the applicant organization to implement the proposed strategies 

and manage the effort.

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

(including the applicant organization) and the scope and strategies of the proposed 

project.

Budget

In addition, peer reviewers will consider and may comment on the following additional items in 

the context of scientific and technical merit.
 NIJ-2018-13640

33

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

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs

4. Alignment of the proposed budget with proposed project activities

5. Proposed plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, 

such as criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from 

the planned scholarly products of the project.

Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the proposed project)

Peer reviewers may comment—in the context of scientific and technical merit—on the proposed 

plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, such as 

criminal/juvenile justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from the planned 

scholarly products of the project. 

Review Process

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for making awards. NIJ reviews the 

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

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

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

minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether an application meets basic 

minimum requirements and should proceed to further consideration, OJP screens applications 

for compliance with those requirements. Although specific requirements may vary, the following 

are common requirements applicable to all solicitations for funding under OJP programs:

• The application must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant.

• The application must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if 

applicable).

• The application must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation.

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

• The applicant must not be identified in SAM as excluded from receiving federal 

awards.

For a list of the critical elements for this solicitation, see “What an Application Should Include” 

under Section D. Application and Submission Information.

Peer review panels will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum 

requirements. NIJ may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, 

to assess applications on technical merit using the solicitation’s review criteria. An external peer 
 NIJ-2018-13640

34

reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given solicitation who is not a current DOJ 

employee. An internal reviewer is a current DOJ employee who is well-versed or has expertise 

in the subject matter of this solicitation. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting 

recommendations are advisory only, although reviewer views are considered carefully. Other 

important considerations for NIJ include underserved populations, geographic diversity, 

strategic priorities, and available funding, as well as the planned scholarly products and the 

extent to which the budget detail worksheet and budget narrative accurately explain project 

costs that are reasonable, necessary, and otherwise allowable under federal law and applicable 

federal cost principles.

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

reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things to 

help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory 

record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the 

applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. In addition, if OJP 

anticipates that an award will exceed $150,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and 

consider any information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the 

integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee 

Performance and Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS"). 

Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any 

information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding 

agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other 

information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by the applicant.

The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a 

framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants for competitive awards. OJP takes into 

account information pertinent to matters such as --

1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity

2. Quality of the applicant’s management systems, and applicant’s ability to meet 

prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial 

Guide

3. Applicant’s history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including scholarly 

products, and compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as 

awards from other federal agencies 

4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the Part 200 

Uniform Requirements

5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively 

implement other award requirements

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

may take into account not only peer review ratings and NIJ recommendations, but also other 

factors as indicated in this section. 
 NIJ-2018-13640

35

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Award notifications will be made by September 30, 2018. OJP sends award notifications by

email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the

authorizing official (E-Biz POC and AOR). The email notification includes detailed instructions

on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award 

acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on 

the award date.

For each successful applicant, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant

will be required to login; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances; 

designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award 

conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires physical

signature of the award document by the authorized representative and the scanning and

submission of the fully-executed award document to OJP.

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements

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

applicable requirements of federal statutes and regulations (including applicable requirements

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

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

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

Applicants should consult the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP

Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2018 Awards”, available in the OJP Funding 

Resource Center at https://ojp.gov/funding/index.htm. In addition, applicants should examine the 

following two legal documents, as each successful applicant must execute both documents

before it may receive any award funds. (An applicant is not required to submit these documents

as part of an application.)

• Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements

• Certified Standard Assurances

The webpages accessible through the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to 

OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2018 Awards” are intended to give applicants for 

OJP awards a general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that 

apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY

2018. Individual OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those

additional conditions may relate to the particular statute, program, or solicitation under which the 

award is made; to the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under

other federal awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other

pertinent considerations.

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements
 NIJ-2018-13640

36

In addition to the deliverables and expected scholarly products described in Section A. Program 

Description, any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the 

following reports and data.

Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual

progress reports, final financial and progress reports, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in 

accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Applicants 

should anticipate that progress reports will be required to follow the non-budgetary components 

of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) template/format. General information on 

RPPRs may be found at www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/rppr/. Future awards and fund drawdowns 

may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, OJP may require additional 

reports.)

Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific 

circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and 

administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP 

award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal 

government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the

award condition posted on the OJP webpage at https://ojp.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm.

Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, an award recipient under this 

solicitation also must provide data that measure the results of the work done under the award. 

To demonstrate program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ with fulfilling its 

responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public 

Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, OJP will require 

any award recipient, post award, to provide performance data listed as part of regular progress 

reporting. Successful applicants will be required to access OJP’s performance measurement 

page at www.ojp.gov/performance to view the specific reporting requirements for this grant 

program.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

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

title page.

For contact information for Grants.gov, see the title page. 

H. Other Information

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

All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the 

federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold 

information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the 

responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one 

of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant 

to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application.

In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in 

those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory 
 NIJ-2018-13640

37

exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and 

names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate 

circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicant/recipient that submitted a responsive 

document.

For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a 

nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that 

involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicant/recipient that submitted the 

application and ask it to identify -- quite precisely -- any particular information in the application 

that the applicant/recipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it 

believes applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicant/recipient, OJP 

makes an independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a 

similar process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement 

sensitive information.

Provide Feedback to OJP

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

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

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

IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for feedback and suggestions only. OJP does not send replies from 

this mailbox to messages it receives in this mailbox. Any prospective applicant that has specific 

questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation must use the appropriate 

telephone number or e-mail listed on the front of this solicitation document to obtain information. 

These contacts are provided to help ensure that prospective applicants can directly reach an 

individual who can address specific questions in a timely manner.

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

resume to ojppeerreview@l-secb.com. (Do not send your resume to the OJP Solicitation 

Feedback email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization or entity 

can be a peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization/entity has submitted 

an application.
 NIJ-2018-13640

38

Application Checklist

Graduate Research Fellowship in Social and Behavioral Sciences

This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application.

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 29) 

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 29) 

To Register with Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 30) 

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 30) 

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 30) 

_____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 30) 

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 28) 

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

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

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

(see page 13) 

After Application Submission, Receive Grants.gov Email Notifications That: 

_____ (1) application has been received

_____ (2) application has either been successfully validated or rejected with error (see page 30) 

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

_____ Please refer to the section: Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues (see 

page 31) 

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements: 

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

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

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

Scope Requirement:

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

Eligibility Requirement: See cover page.

What an Application Should Include: 

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

_____ Project Abstract (if applicable) (see page 15) 

_____ Program Narrative (critical element) (see page 15) 

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (critical element) (see page 19)

_____ Budget Narrative (critical element) (see page 19) 

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 23) 

_____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (see page 23) 

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 24) 
 NIJ-2018-13640

39

_____ Additional Attachments 

Verification of current enrollment (see page 6)

_____ Dissertation chair’s statement of support (or letter of support from a faculty 

advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or individual 

with similar responsibilities (critical element) (see page 7)

_____ Graduate transcript(s) (see page 6)

_____ Bibliography/references (critical element) 

_____ Any tools/instruments, questionnaires, tables/charts/graphs, or maps pertaining 

to the proposed study (if applicable) 

_____ Curriculum vitae, resumes, or biographical sketches of student and dissertation 

chair (or faculty advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate 

studies, or individual with similar responsibilities) (critical element) 

_____ Personal statement

_____ Dissertation committee contact information 

_____ Doctoral student eligibility documentation (timeline or other documentation, as 

applicable) 

_____ Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones 

(critical element) 

_____ Human Subjects Protection paperwork 

_____ Privacy Certificate 

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

investigators 

_____ Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project (if applicable) 

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

has been submitted

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 25)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 26)

_____ Request and Justification for Employee Compensation; Waiver (if applicable 

(see page 12)
i

Funding Webinar Transcript 

On Thursday, February 1, 2018, NIJ hosted a webinar that provided an overview of our 

open solicitations for Graduate Research Fellowships in Social and Behavioral Sciences

as well as STEM.

Following are the transcript and slide presentation from that webinar. 

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Good afternoon everyone, and welcome to today's webinar, 

Graduate Research Fellowship Programs at NIJ, hosted by the National Institute of 

Justice. At this time, I would like to introduce your presenters, Gregory Dutton and Eric 

Martin of the National Institute of Justice.

GREGORY DUTTON: All right. Thank you, Mary Jo. This is Greg Dutton. Good 

afternoon everyone. Thank you all for attending. Many of you may not already be 

familiar with NIJ. The National Institute of Justice is the research and development 

agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Our mission is to bring science to issues of 

crime and justice for the benefit of the nation. I'd encourage all of you to visit our 

website nij.gov to see the range of work that NIJ does. We're primarily a funding agency 

that funds external research and laboratory capacity. An important part of supporting 

any research community is developing the scientific workforce for the future. So NIJ has 

long supported a graduate research fellowship program. In fact, this was one of NIJ's 

first programs decades ago. The goal is to increase the pool of researchers who work 

on problems that are relevant to our mission. And we do this by supporting PhD 

students whose research is relevant to crime and justice. 

For the past several years, the program has had two parallel program tracks. STEM, 

Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, and SBS, Social and Behavioral Sciences. 

At this point, we'd like to open up the poll and invite you to identify which of the tracks 

you're more interested in. I see the poll is open, so that'll be opened. In a minute or so 

we'll let you know what the results are. 

So solicitations. We post invitations to apply, which we call solicitations, every year. The 

two current GRF solicitations have been released {and} are open now and are available 

on the website. These are the documents that list the specific application requirements 

and give you detailed instructions on how to apply. The two GRF tracks have very 

similar requirements with some notable differences that we'll talk about today. But 

please remember the solicitation documents are the ultimate authority on the application 

requirements. The application deadline this year for both is March 12th. 

So I'd like to first give some information about the GRF-STEM Program, that's the 

program that I manage. For those of you who are interested in SBS, be patient, and

we'll get to that soon. The GRF-STEM Program has two basic requirements. Current 

enrollment in a PhD program in an accredited U.S. university in a STEM field, and the 

thesis project must have some demonstrative relevance to criminal justice. So two very 
ii

basic eligibility requirements for the student. The fellowship is meant to support a 

student during the research, writing, and defense phases. It includes a stipend of 

$35,000 a year. This can include what's often classified as fringe expenses like health 

insurance. But it's meant for the financial support of the student. Also, up to $15,000 

annually for tuition fees, and expenses including lab supplies, conference travels, things 

like that. And it gives up to three years of support within a five-year period. So it allows 

for unpaid leaves of absence if necessary. 

Okay. Is the poll complete? All right. So it looks like it's a pretty good split, there's more 

Social and Behavioral Sciences than STEM, about three to two, which is a good thing. 

We'll get to SBS very soon. 

Couple more points about STEM. All STEM fields are eligible. So we're not looking to 

draw arbitrary distinctions. Since a lot of research these days-—many programs are 

multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary. So we show here just some examples of eligible

fields, but all fields that would be considered STEM are eligible. An important point to 

make for GRF-STEM, and this is a distinction from the SBS side, is that for STEM you 

can apply at any stage in your degree program, as long as you're enrolled in an eligible 

PhD program. We've been trying to expand our applicant pool by attracting students 

earlier in their graduate careers. So you can apply for and be awarded a fellowship, a 

STEM Fellowship, and hold it inactive, but the funds won't be available until you're 

thesis topic is approved by your committee. There are some annual requirements to 

stay in good standing to continue to receive annual funding increments under GRFSTEM. So you can see we require every year verification of continued enrollment and a 

letter from your committee chair confirming that you're making adequate progress on 

your project. The program requires annual progress reports where you report on the

progress of your project, report publications and presentations, and then a final 

deliverable is the copy of your defended thesis. 

And GRF-STEM has awarded over 60 new Fellows in the past several years. You can 

see all of their project abstracts on our website. But I wanted to give just a couple of 

specific examples of NIJ GRF-STEM Fellows. Katherine Gettings was a 2011 Fellow. 

Her thesis dealt with correlating Ancestry and Phenotype SNPs with conventional 

Forensic DNA Markers. She's now a staff scientist at NIST. Christy Mancuso is a 2014 

Fellow. Her thesis deals with evaluating the potential for isotopic analysis of human 

fingernails for investigative and forensic purposes. And she plans to defend it later this 

year. 

We anticipate awarding up to 10 new GRF-STEM Fellows for 2018. And we encourage 

all eligible applicants to apply. Now, I will turn the presentation over to Eric Martin who 

will give details about GRF-SBS. Eric?

ERIC MARTIN: Hello, everyone. My name is Eric Martin. Thank you Greg, you did an 

excellent job. I am the social science analyst that is managing the GRF-Social and 

Behavioral Science Program. I'm going to follow pretty much the same format that Greg 
iii

did, and also highlight some of the notable differences between SBS and STEM. So that 

you don't get confused at the time of submission. For GRF-SBS Program, we give up to 

$32,000 to support the final phase of the dissertation research. This is, as Greg said, a 

notable difference from the STEM program, where STEM may be iterative we issue one 

award for the final phase of Ph.D. candidacy dissertation. You need to be currently 

enrolled in a PhD program in an SBS discipline. And again, this is important to note, to 

receive grant funds, you need to have completed your coursework, comprehensive 

exams, and have advanced to candidacy. This is a question we often receive because 

we allow potential applicants to apply if they haven't already advanced to candidacy at 

the time of application. But they need to be there in order to receive grant funds and if 

this applies to you, you need to be specific in their timeline of when you expect that 

advancement to candidacy. Similar to all our grantees, GRF-SBS Program Fellows 

submit bi-annual progress reports and then the official copy of the defended dissertation 

is the final grant deliverable. 

Last year we issued four Fellowships for a total of $127,000. Here are two of our 

notable Fellows, just to give you an idea of some of the topics we've funded in the past. 

Lallen Johnson was a 2010 Fellow from Temple and he studied Drug Market Violence 

primarily, and now he is at Drexel University. And then Naomi Sugie was a 2013 Fellow 

from Princeton and she did her work in Reentry and Collateral Consequences, and now 

she's at University of California, Irvine. One important thing to note, about our GRF-SBS 

Fellows—and I'm sure the same applies for the STEM Fellows as well—

it's just a great entry into NIJ. Our past Fellows often serve as peer reviewers, they 

submit other research to our grant solicitations. And we really want to encourage ongoing relationships. So I commend you all that you're interested in this program, and it is 

a great way to start a career of federally funded research. 

Some important FYIs on the GRF-SBS side. Again, students must be in the final stages 

of their doctoral research. SBS Fellowship only support PhD and other social and 

behavioral science doctoral students, such as the Doctor of Education. MS or JD 

programs are not eligible. And as I said before, SBS funds are one time awards.

Additional funding will not be made available. And then finally, successful applicants 

should clearly state how the research supports DOJ priorities, and these are listed right 

at the outset of the solicitation. So consult those as you begin thinking about your 

application. 

And these are some points of information that apply to both GRF-STEM and SBS 

Programs. The academic institution is the official applicant. We get this question a lot 

and it can be confusing. If you are attending X University, X University is applying for 

this Fellowship, and you are the primary investigator or a key personnel. So, 

international students studying in the U.S. at an American institution may apply because 

the applicant is the academic institution. Academic institutions outside the U.S. are not 

eligible. And then also institutional review board approval for human subjects is not 

required at the time of application. And that's consistent through many NIJ programs. 

But again we ensure IRB protection as part of the research, but you don't have to have 
iv

IRB approval at the time you apply. The student must be enrolled in an eligible PhD 

program at the time of application and the proposed thesis topic must have relevance to 

criminal justice. And then finally— before I pass it off back to Greg, what we suggest 

you do is download the applicable solicitation, and review it for your eligibility. Contact 

your university grants office. Greg and I recommend doing this early. For many of you, 

this may be your first time applying for federal funding and they're an excellent resource 

for you as you navigate all the required materials and create an action plan to get those 

materials in on time. And then, just a perfect segue into the next point. Start assembling 

application materials early. Write up the program narrative, ask for letters of support 

early, obtain enrollment verification. We're going to talk towards the end of this 

presentation on basic minimum requirements. And those all need to be met for a 

successful application to proceed further by the application deadline, which for both 

solicitations is March 12th, 2018. So, now I will pass it back to Greg.

GREGORY DUTTON: Thanks Eric. Okay. So let's say that you determine that you're 

eligible and you're interested in applying. And you're ready to write your proposal and 

submit your application. There are a few important things to keep in mind as you build 

your proposal, so let's walk through the review process that happens after submission of 

the application. The very first thing we do after all applications are received is an 

internal review for basic minimum requirements and for responsiveness. And again a

note, look at the solicitation for the details of all of these requirements. 

So basic minimum requirements, what are those? For GRF-STEM, the basic minimum

requirements are defined in the “what an application should include” section of the 

solicitation. These are labeled as critical elements and you should read criticalas 

meaning “mandatory.” So if your application doesn't have these, it will be automatically 

rejected at the outset-- it won't go any further for review. So it's critical that you make 

sure that these are in your application package. For STEM, the basic minimum

requirement documents are program narrative, so that's the heart of your proposal. A 

budget detail worksheet, budget narrative, verification of enrollment, undergraduate and 

graduate transcripts, and a statement of support from your committee chair, thesis 

adviser or similar person. We suggest that you use descriptive file names to ensure that 

internal and external reviewers don't miss any critical elements in your proposal. And 

again, the solicitations give a lot more detail about what each of these elements should 

contain, and there are links to NIJ resources and examples. So that was for GRFSTEM. The requirements for SBS are similar but a little different. So we'll go through 

those, and Eric can chime in if I get anything wrong here. ...

ERIC MARTIN: Okay. Will do.

GREGORY DUTTON: For GRF-SBS, the basic minimum requirements are defined, 

again, in the “what an application should include” section of the solicitation, and again 

these are labeled as critical elements, meaning mandatory. They must be submitted 

with the application or it won't go any further for review. For SBS, the basic minimum 

requirements are a program narrative (that's your proposal), budget detail worksheet, 
v

budget narrative, resumes and CVs, bibliography and references, a project timeline, and 

a statement of support from your committee chair, thesis advisor, or similar person. 

Again, look at the solicitation for all the specific details. So those are the basic minimum 

requirements for SBS. Moving on from that, we look at responsiveness. Earlier, we

described the scope of the GRF-Program and who's eligible to apply. So what might 

make an application non-responsive? The key place to look for this is in the “what will 

not be funded” section of the solicitation. There's a list of items that could result in an 

application failing our review for responsiveness. The main one for GRF, would be if the 

thesis research doesn't have demonstrated relevance to crime or criminal justice. But 

again, go to the solicitation for a full list. We encourage you to read this carefully. 

So, all proposals that meet the basic minimum requirements and are determined to be 

responsive will then move to External Peer Review. We convene panels of appropriate 

scientists to review the proposals. Knowing what the panels will focus on and what 

they'll score your applications on, can help you in the development of a good proposal. 

These are the review criteria that are detailed in the solicitations. So again, we're going 

to look at both programs. They have specific review criteria that are very similar, but 

slightly different. 

First we're going to look at STEM. For GRF-STEM, there are three scored review 

criteria that are considered by the reviewers. Statement of the problem, project design 

and implementation, and capabilities and competencies. Note the weight in the pie chart 

given to each criterion. The most important factor, 50%, is project design and 

implementation, or scientific merit. So make sure that this is the strongest part of your 

proposal. To facilitate review of the experimental design by reviewer, you should be 

very clear and detailed about your research hypotheses, proposed sampling methods, 

experiments, instrumentation, methodology, data analysis, et cetera. The solicitation 

gives some detail in both what an application should include as well as review criteria 

sections that can help you in writing your proposal to this criterion. Statement of the 

problem, 25% weight, is important in that it encompasses clarity of research questions 

as well as relevance to criminal justice and potential significance to your particular field 

of study. Capabilities and competencies is 25%. This is particularly important for a 

fellowship program like GRF since it considers your preparation, qualifications, scholarly 

record, and honors. Reviewers will also consider the academic environment of your 

institution, program, and advisor. I should note that peer review scores that are based 

on these review criteria are the primary consideration in award decisions. So, pay 

attention to these review criteria as you write your proposals and assemble your 

applications. 

For GRF-SBS, there are four scored review criteria that are considered by reviewers. 

Again, statement of the problem and research questions, project design and 

implementation, capabilities and competencies, and also potential impact. Again, note 

the weights that are given to these criteria. The most important factor again, 50%, is the 

project design and implementation. So, make sure that this is the strongest part of your 

proposal. To facilitate review at the project design, again, you should be clear and 
vi

detailed about your research hypotheses, proposed sampling methods, data analysis, 

etcetera. The solicitation gives additional detail in what an application should include as 

well as the review criteria that can assist you in writing your proposal to this criterion. 

And again, statement of the problem, for SBS is 20%. Capabilities and competencies is 

10%. Potential impact is 20%. That deals with potential for a significant, scientific, or 

technical advance that will improve criminal or juvenile justice in the United States. Eric, 

do you have anything to add on the SBS review criteria?

ERIC MARTIN: Thanks, Greg. Not really, one thing I would say, though, and this is 

applicable to both, the budgets are not rated in the peer review criteria but it's still 

important to be clear in the budget. They're not rated as—there's probably not going to 

be a lot of variation in the budget. But, one, they're still a basic minimum requirement for 

both GRF-STEM and SBS. And also, it is important to really clearly convey what the 

monies are going to be used for to NIJ and the peer reviewers and also it's very good 

practice for additional federal funding to really work through the budget detail worksheet 

and the budget narrative. And then the last thing I would say is, just make sure that, 

especially in the project design and implementation, it is clear and logical that an 

outside reader can understand what the design is proposing to accomplish, how it's 

going to be measured, that kind of thing. And, again, I think that's applicable to both 

SBS and STEM. Thanks, Greg.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah, Eric. That's a good point. So, the reviewers are going to be 

appropriate to your field of study, but they may not be expert in that exact field. I think 

Eric's point, that they need your proposals to be readable by and an informed scientific 

reader. I think that's a great point. So, program timeline, we wanted to give you a sense 

of the GRF timeline for 2018. In past, the awarding timeline has been challenging and 

difficult, and we have, this year, we believe, established the timeline that we can meet 

and that we think will meet your needs. So, here's the timeline for 2018. So, generally 

NIJ posts solicitations once a year. This year, the GRF solicitations posted January 

11th, and they close March 12th. Proposals are received through Grants.gov. Your 

university will submit that on your behalf, so you'll be giving them all the application 

elements that they'll need: program narrative, you'll help them develop the budget, but 

they're going to be the ones to submit it in Grants.gov. So, don't wait until the end to 

contact your university about submitting. And another recommendation I have: often, 

the Grants Office in your university is called something like Office of Sponsored Projects 

or Office of Sponsored Research, but a good thing to do is contact your adviser who will 

be well-versed in dealing with the appropriate University Office and can get you in touch 

with the right people. So, get in touch with them early. Proposals are received through 

Grants.gov. They're internally reviewed by NIJ. We described that. And then they're 

externally peer reviewed. Then awards are made. Grant awards are typically made by 

the end of the federal fiscal year, late September. So, awards should be announced by 

September 30th and that should be a reliable date. The fellowships can have start dates 

of January 1st, 2019 or later —depending on your needs, but they can't start any earlier. 

Funds can be--may be available at that time if all the award conditions are satisfied. For 

example, thesis topic approval, IRB approvals, so if any of those requirements are 
vii

pending, funds may not be available right away. So, between the time that awards are 

announced and January 1st, there'll be some time to clear up any of those remaining 

requirements or, of course, if your topic isn't approved then the award just stays 

dormant until it's approved and you notify us. All right—you can find a lot of additional 

information on the NIJ website, nij.gov, especially under the funding and awards tab, 

which has a lot of information about current funding opportunities, previous year 

solicitations and previously made awards, as well as forthcoming funding opportunities. 

So, if you're interested in looking at past fellows, you can go there so you can see what 

we've funded in the past through this and other programs. Also, you can sign up for email updates when solicitations post for other opportunities. For more information, we 

definitely encourage you to go to nij.gov/GRF for the program page. And just to mention 

some of the other resources that are available to you, so we're going to answer some 

questions in the Q and A portion of the webinar. We'll get to that shortly, but just wanted 

to show you some of the other places you can look for information. So, the program 

page, nij.gov/GRF. For questions about the application requirements, you should 

contact NCJRS. So, we show you here phone contact and web chat contact information 

for NCJRS. All of this information is also on the solicitations. For technical issues with 

application submission, Grants.gov should be contacted directly, but again you won't be 

doing that, your university will be doing it. For a lot of common questions, you can also 

consult our online frequently asked questions or the transcript of this webinar when it's 

posted later. Unfortunately, the one thing that you can't do is contact NIJ program

Staff—that’s us— while the solicitation is open and we're accepting applications. In 

order to maintain fair and open competition, NIJ program staff doesn't give guidance on 

research scope and project design, but we do look forward to answering your questions 

today and seeing your applications soon. So with that, we will move towards the Q and 

A section of the webinar.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yes. So, we have some previously received questions that many 

of you submitted when you registered. So, we'd like to discuss some of those. Right 

now, we'll start with some of those and then we'll get into some of the questions that 

you're submitting in the Q and A feature of the webinar. We noticed that there were a lot 

of questions pre-submitted about eligibility. So, many of these topics, we may have hit 

during the webinar, but I'd like to just reiterate. So some of the questions are, "Are 

fellowships available to students who are not U.S. citizens but attend graduate school 

here?" Yes. So, as long as—so, the eligible applicant is the institution, it's the 

university. So an accredited U.S. institution with a qualifying PhD program qualifies. 

Citizenship of the student isn't considered. "Can you apply without being in a graduate 

program?" No. So, for both STEM and SBS, you must be currently enrolled, correct, 

Eric? For SBS?

ERIC MARTIN: Yes. You have to be currently enrolled full-time to receive award 

funding.
viii

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So you have to be enrolled in a qualifying doctoral 

program. I have another question, "I'm a doctoral student in my first year. I've not yet 

completed my coursework. Am I eligible to apply for the fellowship?" Yes, you can 

apply. Definitely STEM, you can apply at any point as long as you're enrolled. You can 

be awarded a fellowship, but funds won't be released until you get to the point where 

your thesis topic is approved by your committee. And I think for SBS, it's a similar 

requirement, right?

ERIC MARTIN: Yes. You—it is possible to apply, but just to reiterate, you need to be—

for SBS, you need to be advanced to candidacy by the time you receive grand funding. 

And, again, in the timeline, if you have yet to advance to candidacy, you need to 

specifically state when that would be. So, it needs to be in the project—proposed project 

period timeline.

GREGORY DUTTON: Okay. Let's see. I have another question here, interesting 

question about studies, "Where data collection occurs internationally, could that be 

funded if the Doctoral Institution is American and the research questions are relevant to 

U.S. criminal justice?" Yes. So the location where data collection happens wouldn't be 

significant as long as you're enrolled in a U.S. University and the research is relevant to 

criminal justice in the U.S., there would be no problem with eligibility there. I'm going to 

hit a couple more of these. Let's see. "Are there any time restraints on eligibility, that is,

must you be in the first year of graduate program as in the NSF-GRFP?" No. So for the 

NIJ-GRF Programs, you can be at any stage in the program so the SBS is focusing 

mostly—it's more like a dissertation support.

ERIC MARTIN: Yeah. For the final stage.

GREGORY DUTTON: So it's mostly people who are kind of near the end. STEM, we're 

happy to get you earlier in your--in your program, but you can apply at any point as long 

as you're enrolled. You can be near the beginning. You can be near the end. You're 

eligible. But the funding won't be available until you're at the research phase where your 

topic is approved and you're working on research. I have another question. "I'm working 

on a project jointly with two other PhD students. We are all eligible. Would we apply for 

a single fellowship between us?" No. You need to apply individually as an individual 

student. You could—you're all welcome to apply—each one of you apply— and your 

university can submit applications for each one of you, but these fellowships are meant 

to support one student. So, you would want to submit your own application and your 

colleagues may want to submit their own as well. "How does one apply for the 

fellowship? Must an application go through a University's Office of sponsored 

projects?" Yes, absolutely. So you cannot apply as an individual. It needs to go through 

your university, find the right office, and work through them. So, you're going to, you 

know, they're very experienced with submitting applications for federal funding. So, 

they'll help you read the solicitation but you're going to have to give them the application 

elements that only you can provide so the program narrative, that's the proposal. You 

know, your—you're going to have to get your letter of support from your committee 
ix

chair, so you're going to need to help them assemble those but they'll bring it all 

together and submit. "What are some common mistake--" here's a good question. "What 

are some common mistakes to avoid making when applying for this grant?" So the 

biggest one is make sure that all of those critical application elements that we talked 

about in basic minimum requirements, make sure that all of those are in. So, make sure 

that your University Office has all of those and submits them all. The most common 

mistake is leaving out some important mandatory documents. And I would say on the—

on the end of crafting your proposal, I think an important thing is to try to write early and 

revise. So, you know, write a draft of your—of your—of your research proposal, give it 

to your adviser, give it to, you know, other grad student peers, because, you know, they 

can give you a valuable feedback as, you know, as an outside reader and so you can 

only improve your application by having it read by others. Let's see. Let's look at some 

of the other questions.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We have quite a few questions that came through today. 

One that I believe came through the chat and I'm going to address that one, I'll read that 

one first. "For knowledge dissemination, example, conference attendance, date from

submission, September 2019 to acceptance and attendance may fall outside of the first 

year—one-year fellowship SBS. Is that acceptable when asking for conference travel in 

the budget?"

ERIC MARTIN: If—I would saythis—our applicants use award funds for the project 

period, and with any allowable cost that you put in your budget, it's important to give a 

clear justification for that in the budget narrative. So, if it is, you know, clear and it 

benefits the research, our peer reviewers, NIJ staff, and others will review the 

appropriate notes. Other than that, I can't, you know, comment on the appropriateness

of one or the other. But conference travel costs are appropriate to put in and just make 

sure that it is a clear justification for why that is happening.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Next question. "Is the secondary—is secondary data 

analysis acceptable for SBS Fellowship?"

ERIC MARTIN: Yes. SBS Fellowships, where we—as Greg said in the presentation, 

both programs look for appropriateness and relevance and then also the basic minimum 

requirements as they first cut. We're looking more at the appropriateness of the 

question, the research topic, and if secondary data analysis is appropriate to answer 

those questions, then yes. SBS doesn't dictate what data should be used.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We have quite a few questions. But before we move on, and 

just a reminder, when you submit your questions, please use the Q&A tabs and please

select All Panelist. Some of them are being sent privately and it's very easy for us to 

overlook those and we don't want to miss anybody's questions. So the next question we 

have, "My institution uses a system-to-system application program. Can I apply through 

that rather than workspace/grants.gov?"
x

GREGORY DUTTON: So your university might have their own internal system to 

assemble the application elements but they will need to ultimately submit through 

Grants.gov. So I suspect that it's an internal system that you might have but your 

university Office of Sponsored Research will be submitting eventually through 

Grants.gov. So just ask them what they would like you to do to assemble the 

application.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: If I'm taking my last elective course but my—but I am a 

candidate, would I still be eligible for SBS?

ERIC MARTIN: Again, review all the requirements before you apply and receive those 

funds and they are in the solicitation, and right in the solicitation to receive funds, you 

have to have completed all required coursework, pass qualifying comprehensive exams, 

and advance the candidacy, and that's on page six, in the middle of the page, on the 

GRF-SBS.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Is it possible to get samples of successfully funded 

proposals?

GREGORY DUTTON: So we don't have full proposals that are available. You can go 

and look at abstracts of funded fellows but their proposals are confidential. You could 

reach out to one and ask them if they would share with you but we can't post that 

publicly.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We do have a question again, asking to go over the basic 

minimum requirements for the STEM solicitation.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So for STEM, going back basic minimum requirements. 

So Program Narrative, so that's your proposal. Budget Detail Worksheet and Narrative, 

basically describing all the budget request elements that you're making. Verification of 

enrollment, and then the Statement of support from your committee chair or advisor or 

somebody equivalent to that. Any questions about strictly some of those or--what's that?

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Transcript.

GREGORY DUTTON: Oh, transcript. I'm sorry. Thank you. My mistake, I left that off. 

Yes, thank you. Close reading, thank you. Undergraduate and graduate transcripts are 

required, too. That's—I think that's a new requirement this year or last year. My 

apologies. Again, the solicitation is the ultimate authority for these requirements. So, 

please always verify with the solicitation. And those are—you know, we think that the 

transcripts are important for the reviewers to get a sense of, you know, your 

preparation. 

I noticed that there was another question asking—so we talked about peer reviewers for 

these and they were saying, are the peer reviewers, our peers graduate students? No, 
xi

it's not. So, really the peer reviewers here are the equivalent to your advisors. So, 

they’re experienced scientists who have advised many, many graduate students in the 

past. So, we feel that they're the best readers of your applications.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: If one is collaborating with a local criminal justice agency 

such as probation or jail, would it be important to include a letter of support from 

the agency in the application? 

ERIC MARTIN: I would say although not a requirement in a, like, basic minimum 

requirement that Greg was just talking about, but if any type of letter that supports the 

research that can be obtained, definitely submit. So, I hope that answers the question.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: In the year 2019, how many SBS grants does NIJ expect to 

fund?

ERIC MARTIN: In the solicitation, we hope to fund 10. But that number is always an 

estimate going forward. There are a number of different considerations that go into 

NIJ's—the amount of awards it actually funds.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So, it depends on the availability of funding which can vary 

year to year. But if you look at the number of fellows awarded in the past, that's usually 

a good guide. And again, the solicitations anticipate 10 new fellows under each track for 

this year.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Are GXE studies evaluating polygenic risks, genetic risks 

appropriate for SBS fellowship?

ERIC MARTIN: Again, I would go back to the solicitation. And as Greg said, it is hard to 

say, like, the type of research or type of method being used if that would be applicable 

or not or if it's falling into our criteria. But if the student is enrolled in an SBS discipline 

and is proposing research that meets the scope of the solicitation that's relevant to 

crime and criminal justice, then, you know, how that research is being executed, the 

data, and the methods being used are really up to the applicant and, you know, their 

ability to show that that's an appropriate method. And the—again, refer back to the 

solicitation and those criteria are spelled out. So, if the applicant meets those criteria to 

finding a solicitation, yeah, that would be appropriate.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: What is the latest fellowship—what is the late—excuse me. I 

apologize. What is the latest a fellowship may start? For example, if my university 

follows the regular academic year, would it be possible to request a start date for the fall 

semester, example, August 2019?

GREGORY DUTTON: Yes. So, you could request a start date to match up with fall 

semester. Because of the difficulty in us getting awards out to meet the beginning of the 

fall semester, we moved to a model where funds can be available for the beginning of 
xii

spring semester. But if that's not convenient for you, you could request a fall 2019 

semester start date. But another question coming up is could we start before January 

1st? No. So, your start date should be January 1st, 2019 or later.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: There's a similar question, Greg, about a January 1st start 

date, but regarding data collection. So, if the data collection is underway starting 

December 2018, but I will not need funding during this time. Am I disqualified for 

submitting an application if I begin my data collection prior to January 1st, 2019?

GREGORY DUTTON: No, no, no. That would be fine. There's no problem with that. So, 

if you've got, you know, prior data, good for you. There's no problem with that.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Can an university accept any portion of the award for 

administrative costs?

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So, currently after solicitations are written, they could. 

We—in the past, the program has disallowed indirect and administrative cost. But the—

so, our parent agency, Office of Justice Programs, is currently crafting an agency-wide 

policy on indirect cost. So, that may be revised. We're anticipating that that will be 

revised by the time the solicitation closes. So I would say currently indirect costs are 

allowed. Administrative fees, I don't believe. Look at the solicitation carefully. But 

anticipate an OJP indirect cost policy coming out and the solicit—these solicitations 

being revised to reflect that policy before the end date.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: How detailed does the timeline need to be in terms of 

activities prior to the funding period? IRB, proposal defense, et cetera. And is the 

timeline part of the narrative or separate document?

ERIC MARTIN: For GRF-SBS, we ask that the timeline be submitted as part of a basic 

minimum requirement and it can be a standalone document. As far as how detailed, it 

is—it should be or it needs to be—that's hard to comment on. You know, it's definitely a 

case-by-case basis. But as a good rule of thumb, I would say if the timeline can be 

understand—understood by an external reader and clearly shows what activities are 

going to be accomplished in the award period, I think that's a good rule to go by. Again, 

beyond that, I can't really comment on anybody's individual timeline.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Eric, this one will be for you, too, as well.

ERIC MARTIN: Okay.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: In SP—in SBS solicitation on page seven, it indicates that 

human subjects paperwork and privacy certifications are not required at the time of 

application, but those are listed as part of the appendices on page 18 under what an 

application should include. Can you please confirm which one to follow?
xiii

ERIC MARTIN: Yes. We—applicants do not need to have IRB approval to submit their 

application. If they have IRB approval, submit that. That is—that's where the confusion 

comes from. IRB approval is not required at the time of application. But if you have it, it 

gives you a portal and a reminder to submit those materials.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: What about the privacy act and certifications for human 

subjects? Should that be submitted with the application?

ERIC MARTIN: Again, same as, you know, we just said.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Okay.

ERIC MARTIN: It's not a requirement at the time of application. But if it is already 

obtained, you know, if you have IRB approval for your privacy certificate, please submit 

that with the application.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: How much do you weigh a student's advisor's track record 

with securing federal funding?

GREGORY DUTTON: So, I wouldn't—I wouldn't say that...

ERIC MARTIN: Oh, go ahead.

GREGORY DUTTON: Oh, go ahead.

ERIC MARTIN: Oh, I was just going to say I think we're probably going to say the same 

thing, Greg. In the solicitation, we give the criteria of capabilities and competencies. And 

I believe, you know, within that obviously your question would fall. But we can't—we 

can't speak to any individual case and...

GREGORY DUTTON: Okay. Yeah. So, I wouldn't think that securing funding would 

necessarily be as important as publication history and also experience with advising 

other Ph.D. students. But, yeah, so, academic environment is part of the consideration.

ERIC MARTIN: And it's important to know within this, there are, you know, external peer 

reviews, internal NIJ staff review. So, a number of people are going to be reviewing any 

given proposal or application. So, it's hard to say we can't make a definitive statement 

as to what external peer reviewers or internal review may—any given reader or reviewer 

may say.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Can grantees—can grantees hold other grants 

simultaneously with a GRF-SBS?

GREGORY DUTTON: Eric, I can—I can jump in. I think what I'd say applies to SBS as 

well as STEM.
xiv

ERIC MARTIN: Sure.

GREGORY DUTTON: So, yes, you can hold other grants. But it couldn't be paying—it 

couldn't be duplicating the funding. So, if you have another—if you hold another federal 

graduate fellowship, for one thing you'd need to disclose that when you apply, so there's 

a disclosure of pending applications which includes current funding. And if you're, if 

you're currently supported by another federal fellowship program, then we couldn't 

duplicate that funding. Now, if you had some other form of support that's, say, not 

necessarily supporting you specifically but, say, you have another grant--there's another 

grant that's paying for supplies—travel that doesn't duplicate what would be requested 

under the fellowship, then that will be fine. But those are the kind of things that would 

be--that would need to be worked out at the time that an award might be offered or 

accepted. Those things need to be disclosed. You can't get duplicate federal funding 

under two programs for the same thing.

ERIC MARTIN: And information about the disclosure is in the solicitation, you know, 

walk you through how to make that disclosure.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yup. Can I—so I'm just going to jump down to a couple of other 

questions that I can get real fast here. One of the questions was, "Who should be listed 

as the PI, the student or the advisor?" We suggest that the student be listed as the PI, if 

the university allows it. Some universities won't allow that, then, you should put your 

advisor. But ask them. We prefer you to be listed. And, oh, another question here that I 

see that overlaps with the last one we've talked about, "Are there employment 

opportunities during the fellowship?" So I think this means, you know, can you work 

while you're holding the fellowship? You could. You'd need to work that out with your 

university. The university may have requirements for the effort that you put into while 

you're being supported. NIJ isn't monitoring those things. We craft these fellowships 

with the intent that it's sufficient to support you during your research. But you would 

need to work that out with your university if they would allow you outside employment.

GREGORY DUTTON: Okay. So it's at 2:00, I think we can keep going to answer some 

more questions while we're here, that sound okay? Let me see. "Do you need all 

transcripts or just transcripts for the current PhD program?" So, undergraduate and 

graduate transcripts are required for GRF-STEM. Give us as many as you have. If you 

have—if you were enrolled in another program, give us those. 

Another question for transcripts, "If I've attended law school, but I'm currently in a PhD 

program, do I need that transcript as well?" I'd—it may not be necessarily required, but 

if you've got it, why not give it. It would probably give a fuller picture of your background 

in preparation to reviewers.

ERIC MARTIN: And, Greg, if I can just piggyback on what you're saying, I think that...
xv

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah.

ERIC MARTIN: ...applies to a lot of these questions. Like a letter of support from a 

participating agency. Like whatever you could obtain, even if it's not a basic minimum 

requirement, it just supports that application. There is—I don't think we've ever ran into 

a situation where there was too much info about a candidate presented. I hope that 

helps.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah, that's right. We have some budget questions that maybe 

we can address. So one of them was, "Is it appropriate to include tuition in a budget?" 

Tuition is allowable on the STEM Program within that $15,000 tuition fees and other 

expenses category. So, yes, certainly for STEM. SBS, Eric?

ERIC MARTIN: Yes, and I would even submit that question to NCJRS just so I can give 

you a formal answer.

GREGORY DUTTON: Okay.

ERIC MARTIN: Because I don't mean to defer, but I—yes, go ahead and submit that to 

NCJRS and we can give you a formal answer right now.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yup, good idea.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Do you want me to read that one?

GREGORY DUTTON: What was that one again?

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: "Can out—can outside lab be contract--contracted if your 

new--current university does not have the capacity to run specific tests?"

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah, that could certainly be eligible. So, again, in STEM, under 

that up to $15,000 for research expenses, that would be a research expense. So if 

you—if you needed to do some contract analysis elsewhere, you can include that in the 

research expenses category.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: There's a question here about award period.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yup.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: So, is the SBS award made for a period of one year? 

Meaning, the award is given in January 2019 until December 2019. Can it be awarded 

for a shorter period of time, for example, five months or until the academic end of the 

academic year?
xvi

ERIC MARTIN: Typically our awards are made in one year periods. But again, if you 

only need support for those five months and your dissertation will be defended and you 

can submit it to us, five months is fine as long as you can justify in the budget what 

monies are going and your justification for that—those funds. One thing I would say too, 

we have had in the past that's not, it doesn't happen often, but these awards can be, are 

eligible for a no-cost extension, that's on a case-by-case basis. And then, you know, as 

with all NIJ grants, there, you know, it's not automatic that you're allowed in no-cost 

extension, but GRF fellowships are eligible for a no-cost extension. But just to reiterate 

the difference between SBS and STEM, we only make one-time awards. We won't issue 

a new award continuation with additional funds.

GREGORY DUTTON: So there are some questions about whether or not specific 

programs or disciplines are allowable, say, or eligible, under STEM. And without getting 

into them specifically, I would say read the solicitation and apply if you're eligible. We're 

not looking to exclude anyone. So, I gave you the, during the presentation, you know, a 

list of possible fields. Those are just a few. But anything that might be reasonably 

considered STEM and you could look, say, for at NSF or National Academies probably 

have some degree program taxonomies that might give you guidance. But we're not 

looking to exclude anybody. If you reasonably think you're STEM and want to apply, 

please go ahead and apply.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: There's a quick question here, I think it'll be an easy one to 

answer. What do you mean by "descriptive file names" a term that you used for the 

Internal Review and Responsiveness discussion?

GREGORY DUTTON: So I just meant including in the, in the names of the, you know, 

electronic files that you're giving, something that tags what's in there. So, Program 

Narrative, so if you got a PDF of the Program Narrative, put, you know, 

programnarrative.pdf or something that will indicate what's in there. Reviewers find it 

frustrating if they have to hunt and search.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: This is another good question, "The Social and Behavior 

Fellowship Solicitation contains many items that were not listed and the basic minimum 

requirement such as applicant disclosure or pending application, research evaluation, 

and dependence, et cetera, do I need all of these appendix?"

ERIC MARTIN: That's a very good question. There are multiple stages of the process.

GREGORY DUTTON: Can I...

ERIC MARTIN: To...

GREGORY DUTTON: Maybe I can take it, Eric. So...

ERIC MARTIN: Sure.
xvii

GREGORY DUTTON: ...there are a lot of things that eventually you will need before, 

you know, you could get funding under an award. But there are fewer things that are 

absolutely required at the point of application. Those absolutely required ones are the 

basic minimum requirements, right?

GREGORY DUTTON: If you don't have those, your application is going nowhere. But 

the list of all the other things, you know, that's solicited under what your application 

should include, those are necessary too, but it won't get your application bumped. If you 

have those things together and available when you're ready to apply, please include 

them.

ERIC MARTIN: But they're—they will be required for an award. Like you will have to...

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah, you won't get money until you...

ERIC MARTIN: ...need a—yeah.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yes, yes.

ERIC MARTIN: An integrity statement and all that.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yup.

ERIC MARTIN: And I do have—and I apologize to interrupt the flow, I do have, I was 

able to obtain verification on a previous question. Tuition and fees are allowed on 

allowable expense under Social and Behavioral Sciences. We just don't have the carve 

out that STEM does. But it is an allowable expense for that previous question. And I just 

wanted to confirm before I said it because I didn't want to give any false info.

GREGORY DUTTON: So there's a question, "Is there a page limit for the appendices, 

Budget Narrative, et cetera?" There's no page limit, but I would say the solicitation do 

get some guidance into page limits. Please work with those. And the biggest thing that I 

can say is, think about your reviewers, you know. Give them as much information as 

you think they need to understand your proposal. But if there's a page limit and you are 

giving them a ton over that, you may be taxing the attention of your reviewers and that 

might not help you. So we strongly suggest that you abide by the page limits. But no, 

there are no specific limits for appendixes. "Can you budget for less than the full award 

amount?" You can. So I would say for STEM, we certainly encourage full use of the 

$35,000 stipend, we think that's reasonable. The $15,000, the up to $15,000 tuition fees 

and other category, just depends on what you need. So only request what you need 

under that category. But you can certainly request less than the maximum. But there's 

no benefit to you of lowballing budget. There's absolutely no benefit. So, please request 

what you need and we don't encourage lowballing because that does not come into 

consideration for...
xviii

ERIC MARTIN: And that applies to all NIJ solicitations. And I mean the GRF program is 

a little different because our awards are small and pretty much supports the students. 

But for any solicitation—or application rather—submitted to NIJ, just make sure that the 

budget and the Budget Narrative are clear, I think that's the most important thing that an 

external reader can understand what funds are needed and where those funds are 

going.

GREGORY DUTTON: Okay. All right. So we have a question for STEM Projects, "Can 

two students from the same research group apply if they have different projects but use 

similar techniques? Would that hurt the chances of getting the award?" They're 

perfectly welcome to apply. They can both apply, you know, with their own proposals. 

Would it hurt the chances? No, not necessarily. So, each application is reviewed 

independently from all others. So the reviewers look at each application and score 

against their review criteria, so they're not comparing between applications. So, yes, 

they're welcome to apply. So we have another question, "Does the dissertation have to 

be defended by the end of the fellowship year or can this deliverable come after an 

additional writing year funded separately from this fellowship?" Certainly for STEM, no, 

it doesn't have to be. We, for GRF, we would encourage no-cost extensions. So if 

you've used up your funding period but you haven't yet defended, you know, that 

certainly happens. We'd encourage you to use a no-cost extension to keep the 

Fellowship open, even if there's no longer any money available, but to keep it open so 

that once you do defend, your thesis can be attached to the project to show your 

successful Fellowship. So, no, it doesn't have to be defended by the end of the year. 

And I think that's true as well for SBS.

ERIC MARTIN: Yeah. The one thing I would say with SBS, again, we're a little different 

than STEM. These awards are for candidates and their final phase of dissertation, 

research, and writing. Just to make sure that your timeline and your budget are clear, 

and that they complement each other. If something happens and the project goes 

longer than anticipated, that does happen in life. We understand that. And as I said 

earlier, and like Greg just said, these awards are open to a no-cost extension, if that is 

needed. Again, I can't say that that would, there's a hundred percent surety that those 

would be granted, but it is eligible.

GREGORY DUTTON: We have a few questions about numbers of applications and 

numbers of awards. "How many applications are submitted each year?" So on the 

STEM side, the numbers of applications has been growing. Last year we had about 60, 

and we made 20 awards last year. Last year, each award was only made for the initial 

year. Students could apply for two more years after that. So that's why we have 20 last 

year, but this year we're only anticipating making 10, because this year we're going to 

make the awards for the full amount, the full three years. So we have a slightly reduced 

number of awards we anticipate to make this year under STEM, about 10. But that's just 

because the total funding amount is going to be a little larger this year. But, again, 
xix

STEM has been stable that the awards have been for about $50,000 total per year for 

each fellow. 

We had some questions about priorities of topics, especially, under STEM. I want to talk 

about that. Some of the questions, for example, "Are there any priority areas that NIJ is 

interested in funding for the 2018 cycle?" "Are the operational requirements set forth in 

the forensic science technology working group as important today as they were?" So 

the topic of what specific research topics we might be looking for, under GRF, we're 

really interested in supporting students, right? So the goal, the program, and ultimate 

outcome is a productive new researcher. So we're not, in this program, specifically 

looking at what are the topics that we—that we—that we have highest priority. So we—

we're not ranking them by priority areas. Having said that, if you look at the solicitation, 

or the STEM solicitation, it does give you some guidance into topics that you might—

you might consider. So if you look at page five in the STEM solicitation, it talks about 

some of the topic areas under STEM that might be relevant to criminal justice. So we 

give some—we give a list of areas that are encouraged. We also give some links to, as 

the questionnaire noted, forensic science technology working group has a great list of, 

sort of, the needs of the forensic community. So these are just things that you might 

consider, but they're by no means a requirement, and picking one topic over another 

does not give you any priority.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We have a question here. "How many SBS applications are 

received each year?"

ERIC MARTIN: They're pretty steady, between 50 to 70 applications a year.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Perfect. Okay. We're just looking at the questions, and 

we'll—"If an application is funded, is there any room for the project design to be 

adjusted or altered, if it needed—if needed, if the design is approved by IBR?"

ERIC MARTIN: I can take this, if you don't mind, Greg?

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. Go ahead.

ERIC MARTIN: And this is applicable to all NIJ-funded research. We understand that 

just as timelines may change, the scope of the research may change. We understand 

that. We don't necessarily discourage it. It doesn't happen as often as the changes in 

the timeline, but similar to how an awarded grantee will submit a—it's called a grant 

adjustment notification. They’ll submit a GAN, for a no-cost extension. There's also a

GAN, for a change in the scope of work. So, again, if you're doing your research and the 

questions alter slightly or maybe you're using different data than anticipated or whatnot, 

we would just request that you submit that change in scopes. Again, I can't say with a 

hundred percent guarantee that those will get approved, but it's not, it's not unheard of 

at NIJ. We understand the research process and timelines change and also the 

change—the research changes slightly at times.
xx

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: Regarding the SBS Fellowship. "Are qualitative researchers 

at a disadvantage? Are qualitative studies often funded by NIJ?"

ERIC MARTIN: We do not prioritize any one approach or method over the other. Again, 

the biggest thing I could say, and I can't really comment on anybody’s specific research 

proposal, but the biggest thing I could say is just make sure that an outside reader can 

understand why you're using the method you proposed to answer the questions you're 

interested in. And that's applicable across the board. But, no, there's no advantage to—

or disadvantage—to using one method or the—over the other.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: In regards—you want to say it? "Can I apply for the GRF 

STEM, and my advisor apply for the research, and development, and forensic science 

for criminal justice purposes for the same project?"

GREGORY DUTTON: Yes. So that refers to our main forensic science, RND funding 

program. So, yes, you can, you can be funded, you can apply, you can be funded even 

if your adviser is funded under that program. If your adviser had your support in his or 

her budget, then they would just be asked to rebudget because you would be supported 

by the Fellowship, but that's no problem. 

I have another question here. "Is the review of the application by outside scientist 

blinded to the institution or PI information?" No, review is not blind, so reviewers will 

see all of the materials that you give, in terms of, you know, institution advisers. So, no, 

it's not blind. I think that's typical still at this point of most federal funding agencies.

ERIC MARTIN: And it's confidential. I don't know if that was said.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yes. Absolutely. The review is, the review is confidential, but the 

reviewers are not blind to institution or identity.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: "Is there a way for an individual applicant to verify which 

documents have been submitted by the institution?"

GREGORY DUTTON: Oh, great question. I would say you need to—you need to work 

with your university. So you need to verify with them that they've submitted it. Again, 

they're the ones who are submitting through Grants.gov, so, sometimes, it's very rarely, 

but it has happened, that the university inadvertently left some critical application 

elements out. So do what you can to work with them to verify. But, no, there's no way 

that I'm aware of for you to check in Grants.gov what they have submitted. Ask them.

GREGORY DUTTON: I would say ask the university. Ask them to give you maybe a 

screenshot of the application package that they submit, then you can check.
xxi

ERIC MARTIN: And there is, as long as the deadline hasn't expired, if there is any 

question, the university grants office could go ahead and resubmit an application. And 

we just take the latest and most recent application into consideration. We do, every

year, have certain duplicates, and I believe it's for that reason, just to be sure that 

everything was submitted.

GREGORY DUTTON: That's right.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: "And since you can choose another faculty adviser other 

than your dissertation chair, if they are more well-known in the field, would this hurt your 

application at all, assuming this faculty adviser is well-versed in your topic?"

GREGORY DUTTON: I'm guessing that that is actually referring to, when we're talking 

about the letter of support...

ERIC MARTIN: Yeah. I think so.

GREGORY DUTTON: ...you should see the appropriate person. So, first, it should be 

the committee chair. If you have a committee at the time you apply then we ask you to 

get a letter from your committee chair. If you don't have a committee assembled yet at 

the time you apply, you can still apply, then get the most appropriate person to write you 

a letter, so that might be—you may have—it depends on the program. You might have 

someone else who's called an adviser, you might have a director of graduate studies. 

Find the most appropriate person to do it, if you don't have a committee chair. If you do, 

use the committee chair. Like Eric also said, if you think there are other people that it 

would be important for your reviews to hear from, then go ahead and include that. 

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: "Regarding budget, if our graduate students'—if after our 

graduate students' salary, there are remaining funds, can that be used for materials 

needed for the project, transcription services, participant pay—payments, electronics?"

ERIC MARTIN: Just for SBS, check the solicitation for allowable cost. And we don't 

necessarily mandate that X number of funds for a budget have to be in this given 

criteria. One thing I would say is, again, make sure that your budget narrative and 

worksheet are clear and complement each other. Make sure that the numbers are the 

same in each document, and that an external reader can understand where those funds 

are going and why it's appropriate. Check the solicitation. That will have allowable cost. 

And then also, if you're using incentives, or you plan to use incentives, again, check the 

solicitation for there will be additional guidance there.

GREGORY DUTTON: Some more questions. "If I would advance to candidacy in spring 

2019, will I be eligible to apply to this year's solicitation?" So I would say, most likely 

yes. Advancement to candidacy doesn't impact your ability to apply. So you just need to 

be enrolled, certainly for STEM, and I believe, Eric also for SBS. They can apply, is that 

true, even before they've advanced, but...
xxii

ERIC MARTIN: Uh-hmm.

GREGORY DUTTON: ...they wouldn't—they wouldn't get any funding until they've 

advanced.

ERIC MARTIN: At the time--yeah, they have to.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah.

ERIC MARTIN: And there's—for SBS. So three requirements, we talked about earlier, 

have to be met by the time the award is made, but not necessarily by the time the 

application is submitted.

GREGORY DUTTON: Uh-hmm. "Can enrollment be confirmed by an adviser, or does 

the graduate school need to send one for SBS?" You can speak about SBS, Eric, and 

then I'll mention the STEM.

ERIC MARTIN: Uh-hmm. Again, it's clear in the solicitation, and our basic minimum 

requirements are just that. And not to keep touching on the same thing, but I think this is 

a source of a lot of confusion. So the basic minimum requirements that—in 

presentation, we outlined have to be met for the application to advance to an additional 

phase of review. Any additional information is welcome. So make sure that your 

application meets that basic minimum requirements, and anything else you can obtain 

included. And then, again, thanks Greg for switching that.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. Okay. So I'll say for STEM, verification of enrolment is one 

of those critical elements. So you'll need to include that with your application. Look at 

the solicitation. I believe what we suggest is that, if you get a verification from the 

registrar, the university registrar, that would be the best. But it doesn't have to be that. It 

could be something like a current transcript that reflects enrollment in the current term 

or something similar. Look at the solicitation for suggestions there. I think you can—we 

would like you to give better evidence of that than just a letter from your adviser, so 

please get the university to verify. That's not hard to do. 

Let's see. "For STEM, which issues related to the NIJ mission would be considered top 

priorities?" Again, look at the solicitation for some suggestions of topic areas. But for 

GRF, we're not looking at specifically hitting any current priorities. So anything that you 

demonstrate has relevance to criminal justice is eligible and welcome. 

Any particular year of preference in graduate studies? Again, you're welcome to apply at 

any point in your graduate career. But the funding won't be available until you're at the 

research phase and you've got an approved topic. But there's no preference. 
xxiii

Let's see. STEM—again, "Does my project need to specifically apply to one of the 

OSAC RND needs?” It doesn't. If it does then you might want to note that. The 

reviewers--you know, you might want the reviewers to consider that but, no, there's no 

need to specifically respond to any of those posted priority needs. 

"Do I need two letters of support if I have a chair and a co-chair for the dissertation?" 

Sure, why not? Probably not required, you know. I think you could meet the 

requirement with one letter. But if you have co-chairs, then it'll probably be a good idea 

for the reviewers to hear from both. 

"Is—are there any restrictions on length for the program narrative and supporting 

letter?" Again, look at the solicitation for guidelines for length. 

“Can the Fellowship timeline be for less than a year? That is—since the earliest start 

date is January 2019, if you're planning on graduating in August of 2019, can you still 

apply?" Sure. It could be less than a year. So if that's the case then just request funding 

for the time that you anticipate needing. 

Again, "Which research topics are currently more under development?" Latent print 

analysis, sheet print, handwriting. Again, nothing is considered a greater priority than 

another, but you can look at those links that we give for potential topic areas. If you 

notice the STEM selection criteria, they really focus on the—sort of, the project design, 

so the quality of the--of the project, scientific merit of the project. Statement of the 

problem includes, sort of, relevance to criminal justice, but it's really just a threshold 

demonstration of relevance. So there's no real prioritization in that. And then the other 

thing is, your qualifications and your academic environment. So there's no advantage to 

any particular topic prior—topic area priorities. 

"What is the limit of the funding?" Again, look at the solicitation for the specific limits. 

GRF, $35,000 stipend, up to $15,000 for expenses. "Aside from meeting all mandatory 

requirements, what makes a proposed research project the most attractive to reviewers 

for the SBS solicitation?" So if Eric wants to talk about SBS, he can do that or I can.

ERIC MARTIN: I would just say, again, there are a number of people that externally 

read these, and the NIJ Director has sole funding authority for this program. I can't 

comment on what specific topic or approach that’s going to make a given proposal 

standout from the rest, but the one thing I will say is just, clarity is important. Clarity in 

the program narratives and that it--the program narrative flows into the potential impact. 

That there's agreement there. That the budget documents agree, you know. That is not 

going to hurt anyone. It's not going to guarantee funding obviously. There's—I can't say 

one thing that will guarantee funding if I have the power to do so. But to the extent 

possible, it has to be as clear to an external reader who isn't aware—a priority of your 

research proposal. That would be a good thing to shoot for.
xxiv

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So this is Greg. Talking about STEM, and I think this also 

applies to SBS really, look at the review criteria. So those are the things that the 

reviewers are going to be looking at to score your proposal on. And if—your review 

scores are really the most important factor. So look at those criteria. Read what they're 

looking for. The reviewers are instructed to score according to those guidelines. So 

that's really what they're looking for. So they're looking for, you know, a well-designed, 

well-written proposal that responds to the review criteria. So write to those criteria. Have 

your proposal read by others so that you can, you know, revise it. I think that's the best 

advice we can give, have others read it. 

Oh, we have another question here. It says, "Can a PhD student at another institution, 

who is in the process of transferring to the STEM PhD program at my university apply if 

she's accepted for admission before March 12th? She wants to change her field to 

forensic analysis of illicit drugs. Can she apply if she's accepted before March 12th?” 

Yes. Right. So current enrollment is required. So if she will be currently enrolled at your 

university by March 12th, then, yes, she can apply. 

Okay. Budget question. "If we have a federally-negotiated indirect cost rate, is this 

charged on top of the 32,000 Fellowship direct cost or is it expected to be included in 

the $32,000 Fellowship award?" So, again, the program in the past has disallowed 

indirect cost. As it's written now, it allows it, but there will be no—so I would say, yes, 

work within the maximum caps of those budget categories because there won't be 

additional funds beyond the $35,000, $15,000 category limits. And, SBS, I think it's 

similar a thing. I think there still is a hard cap...

ERIC MARTIN: Yeah, $32,000. Yeah.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. On the—on the total $32,000. So when you write your 

budgets and you are including indirect costs at this point, again, it's very possible that

the OJP Policy will come out by the time the solicitation's close. But at this point, you 

should include it within those caps. "If an MD PhD student applies to NIJ funding 

concurrently, and happens to get both, how will this reconcile?" So you can—so you

can certainly apply to multiple funding opportunities, right? So you would need to 

disclose this when you apply. So disclose your pending applications. Look for that in the 

solicitation. It'll instruct you, you know, how to list it. They'll—it'll ask you to give a 

program contact at NIH, so that if both institutions may be considering making awards, 

we can communicate and coordinate. So you're welcome to apply to both. If you both--if 

both of the institutions happen to want to award you, we'll try to work that out 

beforehand but, remember, ultimately, you can't have federal funding from two sources 

for the same thing. So it'll need to be worked out at the end, but don't worry about that 

at this point. At this point, just apply and tell both NIJ and NIH of all the places that you 

are applying to.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: There's a good question here. "The solicitation indicates, it's 

included in the main body of the program narrative, 'figures and other illustrations will 
xxv

count towards the 15-page limit for the narrative section,' but later it says, 'figures are 

not counted against the 15-page limit,' could you please clarify? And I'm not sure if 

that's SBS or STEM."

GREGORY DUTTON: I think it's SBS.

ERIC MARTIN: Yeah. There is a 15-page limit for the narrative. One thing I would 

suggest is if you have lengthy figures and tables, those can be put in the appendix, 

which will not count against your 15-page limit.

GREGORY DUTTON: Yeah. So this is Greg. For STEM, I believe we have a 12-page 

limit. Yeah. STEM is 12-page. And I think in our solicitation, again, look at it for all the 

specifics. We say, you know, if a figure or table is critical to conveying your proposal 

then it should be included in the main body and it should be part of the 12-page limit. If 

it's additional information, then you should include it in the appendix, and there's not 

necessarily a limit. Think of your reviewers. If it's something that you feel is critical for 

them to understand when they're reading your application, then it should be part of the 

12-page limit main body.

ERIC MARTIN: Uh-hmm. And I would say that too.

GREGORY DUTTON: If you're not comfortable with them not—you know, because 

reviewers can get fatigued by getting massive amounts of, you know, figures and 

additional information. If it's important enough that you think they really need to see it, 

put it in the main body and include it as part of the 12-page limit. If it's less important 

and you're not concerned, you're not too worried if they don't necessarily get to it, then 

put it in the appendix.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: "Can I use funding to pay for assistant researchers?"

GREGORY DUTTON: All right. So for STEM, under the $15,000 research expenses, I 

would say if it's, you know, might be considered like contract work—it may not 

necessarily have to be a contract. Your university will figure out how it could be paid for. 

But if there is, say, specific kind of fee-for-service work that you need somebody else to 

do for your project, yes. But you can't pay for another person under the stipend 

category. So if you're paying them for specific analyses under your research expenses, 

then perhaps if your university allows it.

ERIC MARTIN: Just to add, for SBS, as Greg said, contracting for a specific task or item 

is an allowable expense, but just make sure that justification is clear in the budget 

narrative.
xxvi

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: There's another question. "If my undergraduate degree is in 

a different discipline, journalism, and I am now working in SBS, will that work against 

me?"

ERIC MARTIN: Again, refer to the solicitation on the eligibility criteria. And—you know, 

it's hard to comment on--beyond the specific requirements in the solicitation, and 

whether one thing will work against you or not. Again, I just can't comment on individual 

cases. And there are many people who review these, so it's hard to say. But as long as 

you meet the eligibility criteria in the solicitation, then you're eligible to apply.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: I think we've gotten all the questions.

GREGORY DUTTON: Uh-hmm.

MARY JO GIOVACCHINI: We are just taking a quick look. I believe we've answered all 

the questions. Just give us a second. It looks like we have addressed all the questions 

at this time. And we are definitely well over the hour limit. So at this time, we are going 

to end the webinar. On behalf of Greg, and Eric, and everyone at NIJ, we thank you 

very much for joining us today. And we wish you luck in your submissions. Have a great 

day.
Graduate Research Fellowship Programs at NIJ

National Institute of Justice

February 1, 2018

This webinar will begin shortly
Graduate Research Fellowship Programs at NIJ

February 1, 2018

Presenters:

Gregory Dutton

Eric Martin
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

www.nij.gov/about
NIJ’s Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF)

Program Goal:

• Increase the pool of researchers engaged in problems 

relevant to criminal justice, by supporting promising 

doctoral students

Two Program tracks:

• Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics (STEM)

• Social and Behavioral Sciences (SBS)

www.nij.gov/GRF
GRF Solicitations

Funding opportunities posted annually

www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/current.aspx
GRF-STEM Program 

Student Eligibility: 

• Current enrollment in a PhD program in a STEM field

• Proposed thesis project relevant to criminal justice

Fellowship support: 

• A $35,000 annual student stipend

• Up to $15,000 annually for tuition, fees, and research expenses

• Up to 3 years of support usable within a 5-year period 

www.nij.gov/GRF-STEM
GRF-STEM Program 

Eligible fields include, but are not limited to: 

- Anthropology (Physical)

- Biology

- Chemistry

- Cognitive Science

- Computer Science

- Geoscience

- GIS

- Information Sciences

- Materials Science

- Mathematics

- Statistics

- Pathology

- Physics

- Engineering

www.nij.gov/GRF-STEM
GRF-STEM Program 

The student may be at any stage in the degree program 

at the time of application, but fellowship funds are not 

available until the thesis topic is approved.

www.nij.gov/GRF-STEM
GRF-STEM Program 

Annual requirements:

• Verification of continued enrollment

• Letter from committee chair confirming adequate 

progress

Project deliverables:

• Annual progress reports

• Copy of completed thesis

www.nij.gov/GRF-STEM
Some Recent GRF-STEM Fellows

Thesis project: “Fingernails as 

Recorders of Region-of-Origin and 

Travel History”

Currently: Completing PhD

Christy 

Mancuso

2014 Fellow

University of 

Utah

Thesis project: “Ancestry/Phenotype SNP 

Analysis & Integration with Established 

Forensic Markers”

Currently: Staff Scientist at NIST

Katherine 

Gettings, PhD

2011 Fellow

George 

Washington 

University

Up to 10 new GRF-STEM fellows anticipated for 2018
GRF-SBS Program 

Fellowship amount: 

-Up to $32,000 to support final phase of dissertation research 

Fellowship requirements: 

-Current enrollment in a PhD program in an SBS discipline

-Completion of required coursework, comprehensive exams, and 

advancement to candidacy
GRF-SBS Program 

Project deliverables:

• Bi-annual progress reports

• Official copy of defended dissertation 

FY17 awards: 

-4 awards = $127,749
Some Recent GRF-SBS Fellows

Lallen

Johnson

2010 Fellow

Temple 

University 

Dissertation project: “Classifying 

Drug Markets by Travel Patterns: 

Testing Reuter and MacCoun’s

Typology of Market Violence”

Currently: Assistant Professor at 

Drexel University 

Naomi Sugie

2013 Fellow

Princeton 

University

Dissertation project: “Finding Work: A 

Smartphone Study of Job Searching, 

Social Contacts, and Wellbeing after 

Prison” 

Currently: Assistant Professor at the 

University Of California, Irvine
GRF-SBS FYI’s

• Students must be in the final stages of their doctoral research 

• The SBS fellowship supports only PhD or other social and 

behavioral science doctoral students (i.e., EdD)

-MS, JD, or other terminal degrees are not eligible

• SBS funds are one-time awards

-Additional funds will not be available

• Applicants should clearly state how research supports DOJ 

priorities listed in the solicitation
GRF-STEM & SBS FYI’s

• The academic institution is the official applicant 

• International students studying in the U.S. may apply through 

their academic institution

• Academic institutions outside the U.S. are not eligible

• IRB (Institutional Review Board) approval for human subjects 

research is not required at the time of application
GRF-STEM & SBS FYI’s (cont’d)

• The student must be enrolled in an eligible PhD program at the 

time of application

• The proposed thesis topic must have relevance to criminal justice
GRF-STEM & SBS FYI’s (cont’d)

What to do now:

• Review the solicitation for eligibility

• Contact your university grants office (OSP, OSR, etc.)

• Start assembling application materials

1. Write the program narrative (body of the proposal)

2. Ask for letter(s) of support

3. Obtain enrollment verification

Application Deadline March 12, 2018
What are proposals reviewed for first? 

Internal review 

for 

responsiveness

Internal review for 

basic minimum 

requirements

GRF-STEM solicitation (p. 34), GRF-SBS (p. 33), Review Process
What are the basic minimum requirements for STEM?

Moreover, an applicant should anticipate that an application that OJP determines is nonresponsive to the scope of the 

solicitation, or that OJP determines does not include the application elements that NIJ has designated to be critical, will neither 

proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. For this solicitation, NIJ has designated the following application

elements as critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, Budget Narrative, verification of enrollment in a qualifying 

degree program, undergraduate and graduate transcripts (official or unofficial), and statement of support from the dissertation 

committee chair (or, if the student does not yet have a committee, the student’s faculty advisor, department chair, 

departmental director of graduate studies, or an individual with similar responsibilities). An applicant may combine the Budget 

Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant submits only one budget document, it 

must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply 

to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats.

STEM critical (mandatory) elements:

1. Program Narrative

2. Budget Detail Worksheet

3. Budget Narrative

4. Transcripts

5. Verification of enrollment

6. Statement of support

GRF-STEM solicitation (p. 15), What an Application Should Include
What are the basic minimum requirements for SBS?

Moreover, an applicant should anticipate that an application that OJP determines is nonresponsive to the scope of the 

solicitation, or that OJP determines does not include the application elements that NIJ has designated to be critical, will neither 

proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. For this solicitation, NIJ has designated the following application 

elements as critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, Budget Narrative, resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel, 

bibliography/references, project timeline, and a statement of support from the dissertation committee chair or, as appropriate, 

the doctoral student’s faculty advisor, department chair, departmental director of graduate studies, or an individual with similar 

responsibilities. An applicant may combine the Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, 

if an applicant submits only one budget document, it must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the 

“Note on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats.

SBS critical (mandatory) elements:

1. Program Narrative

2. Budget Detail Worksheet

3. Budget Narrative

4. Resumes/CVs

5. Bibliography/references

6. Timeline

7. Statement of Support

GRF-SBS solicitation (p. 14), What an Application Should Include
How is responsiveness determined? 

What will not be funded: 

• Applications for dissertation research by doctoral students who are 

not pursuing research related to crime, and/or the fair and impartial 

administration of criminal justice in the United States. 

• 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. 

See solicitations for the full list.

GRF-STEM (p. 13); GRF-SBS (p. 12), What will not be funded
What are proposals reviewed for next? 

External Peer Review for Review Criteria!

GRF-STEM solicitation (p. 34), GRF-SBS (p. 33), Review Process
What are the review criteria for STEM? 

Statement of 

the Problem ...

Project Design and 

Implementation ...

Capabilities and 

Competencies ...

GRF-STEM See solicitation for the detailed list.

GRF-STEM solicitation (p. 33), Review Criteria
What are the review criteria for SBS? 

Statement of 

the Problem ...

Project Design and 

Implementation ...

Potential Impact

Capabilities ...

GRF-SBS See solicitation for the detailed list.

GRF-SBS solicitation (p. 31), Review Criteria
Program Timeline

GRF-STEM and SBS

FY 2018 Solicitation 

open 

Jan. 11

to 

Mar. 12

Review 

Awards 

announced 

by 

Sept. 30

Awarding 

Fellowships 

may start

Jan. 1, 2019
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: 

GRF program page: www.nij.gov/GRF

For questions about the solicitations, contact:

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS)

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

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