U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

National Institute of Justice 

The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice 

is seeking applications for funding for empirical data collection and research on wrongful 

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

provide objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to meet the 

challenges of crime and justice, particularly at the State and local levels. 

Solicitation: 

Social Science Research on 

Wrongful Conviction 

Eligibility 

 (See “Eligibility,” page 4) 

Deadline 

Registration with Grants.gov is required prior to application submission. 

(See “Registration,” page 3) 

All applications are due March 16, 2009, 11:59 p.m. eastern time. 

Contact Information 

For assistance with the requirements of this solicitation, contact Bethany Backes, Social 

Science Analyst, at 202–305–4419 or Bethany.Backes@usdoj.gov. 

This application must be submitted through Grants.gov. For technical assistance with 

submitting the application, call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 1–800–518– 

4726 or send an e-mail to support@grants.gov. 

Note: The Grants.gov hours of operation are Monday–Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. 

eastern time. 

Grants.gov Funding Opportunity No. NIJ–2009–1936 

SL# 000847 
CONTENTS 

Overview ........................................................................................................................... 3
 

Deadline: Registration....................................................................................................... 3 

Deadline: Application ........................................................................................................ 4 

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

Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations ................................................ 4 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Tribes and/or Tribal Organizations....5
 

Specific Information ........................................................................................................... 5 

Performance Measures ..................................................................................................... 9 

How to Apply................................................................................................................... 10 

What an Application Must Include................................................................................... 11 

Selection Criteria............................................................................................................. 14 

Review Process .............................................................................................................. 15 

Additional Requirements................................................................................................. 16 

2
 
Social Science Research on 

Wrongful Conviction

CFDA No. 16.560 

Overview 

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the research, development, and evaluation 

agency of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and a component of the Office of 

Justice Programs (OJP). NIJ provides objective, independent, evidence-based 

knowledge and tools to enhance the administration of justice and public safety. NIJ 

solicits applications to inform its search for the knowledge and tools to guide policy and 

practice. 

NIJ is interested in stimulating a scientifically rigorous body of research on the topic of 

wrongful convictions, specifically focusing on the 200-plus cases of exonerations based 

on post-conviction DNA examinations, and comparisons of DNA-based and non-DNAbased exonerations. Thus far, there have been over 200 cases of post-conviction DNA 

exonerations in the United States identified by media and interested organizations; 

however, there has been little social-science-based research on this topic. This 

solicitation is intended to support a more expansive and empirical examination of 

wrongful convictions than currently exists. In particular, this solicitation seeks to fund 

research on post-conviction DNA exonerations in the investigation, trial, and postconviction stages of the criminal justice process as well as a comparison to non-DNA 

exonerations. Proposals should seek to optimize the extent of the data that can be 

collected in each of these three stages. A strong preference will be given to 

proposals for the collection and analysis of data in all three of these stages. 

Deadline: Registration 

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

occur and it can take up to several weeks for first-time registrants to receive 

confirmations/user passwords. OJP highly recommends that applicants start the 

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

package to our agency by the application deadline specified. The registration process for 

organizations involves these steps: (1) Obtain a Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) number; (2) Register your organization with the Central Contractor Registration 

(CCR) database; (3) Register with Grants.gov’s Credential Provider and obtain a 

username and password; (4) Register with Grants.gov to establish yourself as an 

Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and (5) The E-Business Point of 

Contact (POC) assigns the “Authorized Applicant Role” to you. For more information 

about the registration process, go to www.grants.gov. Note: Your CCR must be 

renewed once a year. Failure to renew the CCR may prohibit submission of a grant 

application through Grants.gov. 

3
 
Deadline: Application 

The due date for applying for funding under this announcement is March 16, 2009, 

11:59 p.m. eastern time. 

Within 24 to 48 hours after submitting your electronic application, you should receive an 

e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The validation message will tell you if the 

application has been received and validated or has been rejected, and why. 

Important: You are urged to submit your application at least 72 hours prior to the due 

date of the application to allow time to receive the validation message and to correct any 

problems that may have caused the rejection notification. 

If you experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond your control, you must 

contact OJP staff within 24 hours after the due date and request approval to submit 

your application. At that time, OJP staff will require you to e-mail the complete grant 

application along with your DUNS number and provide a Grants.gov Help Desk tracking 

number(s). After OJP reviews all of the information submitted and contacts Grants.gov to 

validate the technical issues reported by the applicant, OJP will contact you to either 

approve or deny the request. 

To ensure a fair competition for limited discretionary funds, the following conditions are 

not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) failure to begin the registration process 

in sufficient time; (2) failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply 

as posted on its website; (3) failure to follow all of the instructions in the OJP solicitation; 

and (4) technical issues experienced with the applicant’s computer or information 

technology (IT) environment. 

Eligibility 

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

agreements with, States (including territories), local governments (including federally 

recognized Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions), nonprofit 

and profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit and profit organizations), institutions of 

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

individuals. Foreign governments, foreign organizations, and foreign institutions of higher 

education are not eligible to apply. 

Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations: Consistent with Executive Order 

13279, dated December 12, 2002, and 28 C.F.R. Part 38, it is DOJ policy that faithbased and other community organizations that statutorily qualify as eligible applicants 

under DOJ programs are invited and encouraged to apply for assistance awards to fund 

eligible grant activities. Faith-based and other community organizations will be 

considered for awards on the same basis as other eligible applicants and, if they receive 

assistance awards, will be treated on an equal basis with all other grantees in the 

administration of such awards. No eligible applicant or grantee will be discriminated for 

or against on the basis of its religious character or affiliation, religious name, or the 

religious composition of its board of directors or persons working in the organization. 

4
 
Faith-based organizations receiving DOJ assistance awards retain their independence 

and do not lose or have to modify their religious identity (e.g., remove religious symbols) 

to receive assistance awards. DOJ grant funds, however, may not be used to fund any 

inherently religious activity, such as prayer or worship. Inherently religious activity is 

permissible, although it cannot occur during an activity funded with DOJ grant funds; 

rather, such religious activity must be separate in time or place from the DOJ-funded 

program. Further, participation in such activity by individuals receiving services must be 

voluntary. Programs funded by DOJ are not permitted to discriminate in the provision of 

services on the basis of a beneficiary’s religion. 

If your organization is a faith-based organization that makes hiring decisions on the 

basis of religious belief, it may be entitled, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 

42 U.S.C. § 2000bb, to receive Federal funds and yet maintain that hiring practice, even 

if the law creating the funding program contains a general ban on religious discrimination 

in employment. For the circumstances under which this may occur, and the certifications 

that may be required, please see the section titled “Funding to Faith-Based 

Organizations” on the "Other Requirements for OJP Applications" Web page at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

Applicants are also encouraged to review the “Civil Rights Compliance” section of the 

“Other Requirements for OJP Applications” Web page, which also can be found at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

American Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Tribes and/or Tribal Organizations: If a 

grant application is being submitted on behalf of a tribe or tribal organization, a current 

authorizing resolution of the governing body of the tribal entity or other enactment of the 

tribal council or comparable government body authorizing the inclusion of the tribe or 

tribal organization named in the application must be included with the application. 

Specific Information—Social Science Research on 

Wrongful Conviction 

Wrongful convictions are an inherently difficult topic to study, but the increase in 

exonerations over the past two decades has accentuated the need for research on how 

and why wrongful convictions occur. The major factor contributing to the increased 

discovery of wrongful convictions has been the use of post-conviction DNA 

examinations. Exonerations using DNA evidence have been well publicized, whereas 

non-DNA exonerations have typically been difficult to track, but both are important in 

determining the major factors behind wrongful conviction.1 

The post-conviction DNA examination of cases that preceded the common use of pretrial 

DNA analyses provides an unprecedented opportunity to assess the validity of criminal 

convictions. The primary objective of this solicitation is to capitalize on the existence of 

this valuable data by collecting and analyzing it while it is still available. 

1

 Gross, S.R., Jacoby, K., Matheson, D.J., Montgomery, N., Patil, S. (2005). Exonerations in the United 

States 1989 through 2003. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 95(2), 523-560. 

5
 
Actual Innocence Wrongful Convictions 

A wrongful conviction can be understood as the conviction of an individual of a crime 

that person did not commit. The “crime that person did not commit” could refer to an 

“actual innocence” mistake (in which the convicted offender was not even involved in the 

actual crime), or it could refer to a “legal innocence” mistake (in which the convicted 

individual was involved in the crime to a different extent than the crime represented by 

the charge). The terms “wrongful conviction” and “actual innocence” have often been 

used interchangeably, but a distinction is necessary to define the scope of the 

information sought for this solicitation. For purposes of this solicitation, all cases 

collected and analyzed should be cases of actual innocence. 

Forensic DNA examinations have provided for more definitive evidence than 

investigative and forensic methods previously available, and forensic DNA has been 

readily incorporated into the trial process. Current and past research in the area of 

wrongful convictions has largely been anecdotal, creating broad generalizations about 

the nature of wrongful convictions from a cursory review of cases identified through postconviction DNA examinations and other methods. Mistaken eyewitness identification, 

false confessions, poor forensic science examinations, and other factors have frequently 

been identified as correlates of wrongful convictions, and despite some concerns about 

validity of the research, these insights have virtually defined the common understanding 

of wrongful convictions.2 

Unfortunately, the pool of important data on pre-DNA era wrongful convictions has 

tended to shrink over time. As memories fade, case files are lost, involved parties pass 

away, etc., the window closes on the opportunity to collect detailed information about the 

characteristics of these cases. Prior and current findings have primarily been based in 

legal research, and there has yet to be a study fully incorporating rigorous social science 

methods to the topic of wrongful conviction.3

 By applying established social science 

research methods to the examination of exonerations, an increased level of confidence 

can be placed in the conclusions of this new area of research. 

NIJ is interested in stimulating further research on the topic of wrongful convictions, 

specifically focusing on the 200-plus cases of DNA exonerations and a comparison 

group of non-DNA exonerations. This solicitation is intended to contribute to this effort by 

providing support for the critical first steps in developing a more expansive and empirical 

examination of wrongful convictions. 

Data Collection 

Researchers have already collected, analyzed, and published information on many of 

the confirmed cases of wrongful conviction. Their work, while an excellent contribution to 

a field that would otherwise offer no data at all, has pointed the way to issues in the field 

and stimulated an interest in this important topic.4

 This solicitation intends to expand on 

the work already done in order to fully understand the nature of the problem. 

2 Leo, R. A. (2005). Rethinking the study of miscarriages of justice: Developing a criminology of wrongful
 

conviction. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(3), 201-223.
 3 Garrett, B. L. (2008). Judging innocence. Columbia Law Review, 108(1), 55-142.

4 Zalman, M. (2006). Criminal justice system reform and wrongful conviction. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 

17(4), 468-492.
 

6
 
A significant component of the effort to stimulate and promote more scientifically 

rigorous research in the field of wrongful convictions is the extensive collection of 

relevant data for use in this and future research. The desired data would be detailed, 

and should extend as far as reasonably possible including the 200-plus cases of DNA 

exoneration. 

Proposals for this solicitation should include descriptions of extensive secondary source 

collection and coding procedures for materials, such as: 

• Court records 

• Case filings 

• Newspaper articles 

• Police reports 

•	 Other published accounts 

Proposals for this solicitation should also include descriptions of recruitment and 

interview procedures for potentially relevant individuals, such as: 

• Exonerees 

• Prosecutors 

• Investigators 

• Judges 

• Defense attorneys 

• Victims 

• Eyewitnesses 

•	 Other relevant individuals 

Three Potential Stages for Examination 

Understanding of wrongful convictions and how they occur can be conceptually divided 

into three stages. Proposals should seek to optimize data collection in each of these 

three stages. The questions included under each stage approximate the scope and 

extent of NIJ’s interest in each stage, but is not necessarily meant as an exhaustive list. 

•	 Investigation—At the early stages of what becomes a wrongful conviction, what 

happened? Examples of questions that could be asked at this stage include: 

o	 How did the investigators identify the suspect? 

o	 Had they identified the actual perpetrator? 

o	 Why did they focus on one person over another? 

o	 What forms of evidence did the investigators collect? 

•	 Trial—After the identification of the wrong individual, what happened when the 

prosecutor became involved in the case? Examples of questions that could be 

asked at this stage include: 

o	 What types of evidence were presented? 

o	 Was there a Grand Jury indictment or an information/complaint? 

o	 Did the individual testify? 

7
 
o	 How often was there a jury trial? 

o	 How did the individual plead? 

o	 What type of representation did the individual have? 

•	 Appeal and Remedy—After an individual was wrongfully convicted, what did the 

individual do? Examples of questions that could be asked at this stage include: 

o	 What claims were raised during appeal? 

o	 How was the wrongful conviction demonstrated? 

o	 What was the process from demonstration of a wrongful conviction to 

release? 

o	 How often were different release mechanisms (e.g., retrial, court order, 

pardon) used? 

o	 What forms and amount of compensation have been offered and by 

whom? 

o	 How long was the process from wrongful conviction to release of the 

individual? 

Evaluation Research: Within applications proposing evaluation research, funding 

priority will be given to experimental research designs that use random selection and 

assignment of participants to experimental and control conditions. When randomized 

designs are not feasible, priority will be given to quasi-experimental designs that include 

contemporary procedures like Propensity Score Matching and Regression Discontinuity 

Design to address selection bias in evaluating outcomes and impacts. 

Evaluations that also include measurements of program fidelity and implementation as 

part of a thorough process assessment are desirable. Measurements of program fidelity 

should be included as part of an assessment of program processes and operations to 

ensure that policies, programs, and technologies are implemented as designed. As one 

aspect of a comprehensive evaluation, assessments of program processes should 

include objective measurements and qualitative observations of programs as they are 

actually implemented and services are delivered. These may include assessment of 

such aspects as adherence to program content and protocol, quantity and duration, 

quality of delivery, and participant responsiveness. 

Proposed evaluation research designs with multiple units of analysis and multiple 

measurements will also be given priority. Design aspects that contribute to the validity of 

results are necessary to effectively address issues of generalizability and 

representativeness of findings. 

Finally, applications that include additional cost/benefit analysis will be given priority. NIJ 

views cost/benefit analysis as an effective way to communicate and disseminate findings 

from evaluation research. 

Please note: All applicants under this solicitation must comply with Department of Justice 

regulations on confidentiality and human subjects protection. See “Other Requirements for 

OJP Applications” at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

8
 
What will not be funded: 

1. Provision of training or direct service. 

2. Proposals primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (Your budget 

may include these items if they are necessary to conduct applied research, 

development, demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.) 

3. Work that will be funded under another specific solicitation. 

Cost of proposed work: NIJ anticipates that up to a total of $600,000 may become 

available for an award made through this solicitation. All NIJ awards are subject to the 

availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional 

requirements that may be imposed by law. NIJ expects to make one award, 

depending on funds available, the number of high-quality applications, and other 

pertinent factors. If you propose a project that exceeds the amount of money that may 

be available for this solicitation, we recommend that you divide the project into phases, 

stages, or tasks so that NIJ can consider making an award for a specific portion of the 

work. NIJ cannot guarantee that subsequent phases, stages, or tasks will be funded. 

Such additional funding depends on, among other things, NIJ resources, strategic 

priorities, and your satisfactory completion of each phase, stage, or task. Note: 

Deliverables (e.g., a final report) will be required at the end of each phase, stage, or 

task. 

Applicants should be aware that the total period for an award, including one that 

receives additional funding, ordinarily will not exceed three years. 

A grant made by NIJ under this solicitation may account for up to 100 percent of the total 

cost of the project. See "Cofunding," under "What an Application Must Include." 

Limitation on use of award funds for employee compensation; waiver: No portion 

of any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation may be used to pay 

any portion of the total cash compensation (salary plus bonuses) of any employee of the 

award recipient whose total cash compensation exceeds 110 percent of the maximum 

annual salary payable to a member of the Federal government’s Senior Executive 

Service (SES) at an agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that 

year. (The salary table for SES employees is available at http://www.opm.gov.) 

This prohibition may be waived at the discretion of the Assistant Attorney General for the 

Office of Justice Programs. An applicant that wishes to request a waiver should include 

a detailed justification in the budget narrative for the application. 

Performance Measures 

To assist in fulfilling the Department’s responsibilities under the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA), P.L. 103–62, applicants who receive funding 

under this solicitation must provide data that measure the results of their work. 

Performance measures for this solicitation are as follows: 

9
 
Objective Performance Measures Data Grantee Provides 

Develop and analyze information 

and data on the investigation, 

trial, and/or appeal and remedy of 

wrongful convictions, which have 

clear implications for criminal 

justice policy, practice, and 

research. 

Relevance to the needs of the 

field as measured by whether 

the grantee’s substantive scope 

did not deviate from the funded 

proposal or any subsequent 

agency modifications to the 

scope. 

Quality of the research as 

assessed by peer reviewers. 

Quality of management as 

measured by whether 

significant interim project 

milestones were achieved, final 

deadlines were met, and costs 

remained within approved 

limits. 

If applicable, number of NIJ 

final grant reports, NIJ research 

documents, and grantee 

research documents published. 

A final report providing a 

comprehensive overview of the 

project and a detailed description 

of the project design, data, and 

methods; a full presentation of 

scientific findings; and a thorough 

discussion of the implications of 

the project findings for criminal 

justice practice and policy. 

Quarterly financial reports, semiannual progress reports, and a 

final progress report. 

Each data set that was collected, 

acquired, or modified in 

conjunction with the project. 

If applicable, citation to 

report(s)/document(s). 

How to Apply 

DOJ is participating in the e-Government initiative, one of 25 initiatives included in the 

President’s Management Agenda. Part of this initiative—Grants.gov—is a “one-stop 

storefront” that provides a unified process for all customers of federal grants to find 

funding opportunities and apply for funding.
 

Grants.Gov Instructions: Complete instructions can be found at www.grants.gov. 

If you experience difficulties at any point during this process, please call the Grants.gov 

Customer Support Hotline at 1–800–518–4726, Monday–Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.
 

eastern time. 

Funding Opportunities with Multiple Purpose Areas: Some OJP solicitations posted 

to Grants.gov contain multiple purpose areas, denoted by the individual Competition ID. 

If you are applying to a solicitation with multiple Competition IDs, you must select the 

appropriate Competition ID for the intended purpose area of your application. The 

application will be peer reviewed according to the requirements of the purpose area 

under which it is submitted. 

Note: OJP’s Grants Management System (GMS) does not support Microsoft Vista 

or Microsoft 2007. Therefore, OJP will not review any application whose 

attachments are in Microsoft Vista or Microsoft 2007 format. GMS downloads 

applications from Grants.gov and is the system in which OJP reviews applications and 

manages awarded grants. Applications submitted via GMS must be in the following 

formats: Microsoft Word (*.doc), Word Perfect (*.wpd), PDF files (*.pdf), or Text 

10
 
Documents (*.txt), and may include Microsoft Excel (*.xls) files. GMS is not yet 

compatible with Vista and cannot yet process Microsoft Word 2007 documents saved in 

the new default format with the extensions of “.docx.” Please ensure the documents you 

are submitting in Grants.gov are saved using “Word 97–2003 Document (*.doc)” format. 

Additionally, 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." 

CFDA Number: The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for this 

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

Development Project Grants,” and the Grants.gov funding opportunity number is NIJ–

2009–1936. 

A DUNS number is required: The Office of Management and Budget requires that all 

businesses and nonprofit applicants for Federal funds include a DUNS (Data Universal 

Numeric System) number in their application for a new award or renewal of an award. 

Applications without a DUNS number are incomplete. A DUNS number is a unique ninedigit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and keeping track of 

entities receiving Federal funds. The identifier is used for tracking purposes and to 

validate address and point-of-contact information for Federal assistance applicants, 

recipients, and subrecipients. The DUNS number will be used throughout the grant life 

cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, simple, one-time activity. Obtain one by 

calling 1–866–705–5711 or by applying online at http://www.dnb.com/us. Individuals are 

exempt from this requirement. 

Central Contractor Registration (CCR) is required: In addition to the DUNS number 

requirement, OJP requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for Federal financial 

assistance maintain current registrations in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) 

database. The CCR database is the repository for standard information about Federal 

financial assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. Organizations that have 

previously submitted applications via Grants.gov are already registered with CCR, as it 

is a requirement for Grants.gov registration. Please note, however, that applicants must 

update or renew their CCR at least once per year to maintain an active status. 

Information about registration procedures can be accessed at www.ccr.gov. 

What an Application Must Include 

An application must include the following: 

Standard Form 424 

Program Narrative 

The Program Narrative includes: 

a. Abstract (not to exceed 600 words). 

The abstract should state the problem under investigation (including goals 

and objectives of the proposed project) and the anticipated relevance of 

the project to criminal justice public policy, practice, or theory applicable 

to the United States. It should describe the proposed method and/or 

research design, including data to be used in addressing research 

11
 
questions, data collection procedures and instrumentation, access to 

data, and other methods or procedures of the proposed study. It should 

also describe procedures for data analysis and all expected products, 

including interim and final reports, instrumentation, devices, and data sets 

to be submitted in accordance with the Data Archiving Strategy (see 

below). If applicable, it should describe the subjects who will be involved 

in the proposed project, including the number of participants; participants’ 

age, gender, and race/ethnicity; and other pertinent characteristics, such 

as methods used to gain access to subjects. 

b. Resubmit response (if applicable). 

If you are resubmitting a proposal that was submitted, but not funded, 

under a previous solicitation, you must provide a response indicating that 

your proposal is a revision and that it was submitted before. You should 

prepare a two-page response to the earlier panel review that includes (1) 

the title, submission date, and NIJ-assigned application number of the 

previous proposal, and (2) a brief summary of responses to the review 

and/or revisions to the proposal. Insert the response after the abstract. 

c. Table of contents. 

d. Main body. 

The main body of the Program Narrative should describe the project in 

depth and include the following sections: 

• Purpose, goals, and objectives. 

• Review of relevant literature. 

• Research design and methods. 

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

• Management plan and organization. 

• Dissemination strategy. 

e. Appendixes. 

Appendixes are not counted against program narrative page limit and 

must include: 

• Bibliography/References (if applicable). 

• Data Archiving Strategy (see “Other Program Attachments” below). 

• List of key personnel (required). 

• Résumés of key personnel (required). 

• List of previous and current NIJ awards (required). 

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project (if applicable). 

• Chart for timeline, research calendar, or milestones (required). 

• Other materials required by the solicitation. 

Budget Detail Worksheet 

The Budget Detail Worksheet should address the full scope, duration, and cost of the 

project. The Budget Detail Worksheet should include a breakdown of costs associated 

with each budget category, including itemizations and calculations where necessary. 

The budget must be broken down on a year-by-year basis over the length of the project. 

That is, if the proposed project is 3 years, then there should be a separate budget for 

year one, year two, and year three. 

12
 
Templates for filling out the Budget Detail Worksheet may be found online at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms/budget_detail.pdf, OJP Standard Forms & 

Instructions. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer's Customer Service Center at 1–800–458–0786. 

Budget Narrative 

The Budget Narrative is a plain-language description of each of the proposed 

expenditures listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. It should clearly explain the purpose 

and reason for all expenditures in the budget. There should be no ambiguities about any 

budget item. The narrative should also include details for calculated rates or other 

figures. 

As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative must be broken down on a 

year-by-year basis. 

Indirect Rate Agreement (if applicable) 

Applicants that do not have a federally negotiated indirect cost rate and wish to establish 

one can submit a proposal to their “cognizant” Federal agency. Generally, the cognizant 

Federal agency is the agency that provides the preponderance of direct Federal funding. 

This can be determined by reviewing an organization’s schedule of Federal financial 

assistance. If DOJ is your cognizant Federal agency, obtain information needed to 

submit an indirect cost rate proposal at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/part3/part3chap17.htm. 

Other Program Attachments 

These include several forms, available on OJP’s funding page at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms.htm. 

Data Archiving Strategy: NIJ requires that each data set resulting from funded 

research be submitted as a grant product or deliverable for archiving with the National 

Archive of Criminal Justice Data. (Data sets are to be submitted 90 days before the end 

of the project period.) Applications for NIJ research grants must include a brief (one- or 

two-page) data archiving strategy. For purposes of research replication and extension, 

the inclusion of only the final data set often prevents other researchers from replicating 

or extending the study because there are no original data, intermediate data, or 

documentation detailing how the data changed throughout the project. This data 

archiving strategy therefore must briefly describe the— 

•	 Anticipated manipulations of original, intermediate, and final data sets (as 

applicable).
 

•	 Methods of documentation of such manipulations. 

•	 Preparation of original, intermediate, and final data sets for archive submission. 

The data archiving strategy should be submitted as an appendix to the application and 

will NOT count toward the 30-page limit. Please label this appendix “Data Archiving 

Strategy.” 

Page limit: The program narrative section of your application must not exceed 30 

double-spaced pages in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. Abstract, resubmit response, 

13
 
table of contents, charts, figures, appendixes, and government forms do not count 

toward the 30-page limit for the narrative section. 

Cofunding: A grant made by NIJ under this solicitation may account for up to 100 

percent of the total cost of the project. You must indicate whether you believe it is 

feasible for you to contribute cash, facilities, or services as non-Federal support for the 

project. Your application should identify generally any such contributions that you expect 

to make and your proposed budget should indicate in detail which items, if any, will be 

supported with non-Federal contributions. 

Selection Criteria 

Successful applicants must demonstrate the following: 

Statement of the Problem/Program Narrative (Understanding of the problem and its 

importance)—15% 

1. Clarity of problem statement. 

2. Awareness of relevant research. 

3. Connection between proposed research and problem. 

Project/Program Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit)—30% 

1. Awareness of the state of current research or technology. 

2. Soundness of methodology and analytic and technical approach. 

3. Feasibility of proposed project and awareness of pitfalls. 

4. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate). 

Capabilities/Competencies (Capabilities, demonstrated productivity, and experience of 

applicants)—20% 

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed staff. 

2. Demonstrated ability of proposed staff and organization to manage the effort. 

3. Adequacy of the plan to manage the project, including how various tasks are 

subdivided and resources are used. 

4. Successful past performance on NIJ grants and contracts (when applicable). 

Budget—15% 

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit. 

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs. 

Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation (Relevance to policy and practice)—15% 

1. Potential for significant advances in scientific or technical understanding of the 

problem. 

2. Potential for significant advances in the field. 

3. Relevance for improving the policy and practice of criminal justice and related 

agencies and improving public safety, security, and quality of life. 

4. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed end products, when applicable 

(e.g., purchase price and maintenance costs for a new technology or cost of 

training to use the technology). 

14
 
5. Perceived potential for commercialization and/or implementation of a new 

technology (when applicable). 

Dissemination Strategy—5% 

1. Well-defined plan for the grant recipient to disseminate results to appropriate 

audiences, including researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. 

2. Suggestions for print and electronic products NIJ might develop for practitioners 

and policymakers. 

Relevance of the project for policy and practice: 

Higher quality applications clearly explain the practical implications of the project. They 

connect technical expertise with criminal justice policy and practice. To ensure that the 

project has strong relevance for policy and practice, some researchers and technologists 

collaborate with practitioners and policymakers. You may include letters showing support 

from practitioners, but they carry less weight than clear evidence that you understand 

why policymakers and practitioners would benefit from your work and how they would 

use it. While a partnership may affect State or local activities, it should also have broader 

implications for others across the country. 

Review Process 

OJP is committed to ensuring a standardized process for awarding grants. NIJ reviews 

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

understandable, measurable, achievable, and consistent with program or legislative 

requirements as stated in the solicitation. 

Peer reviewers will be reviewing the applications submitted under this solicitation as 

well. NIJ may use either internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a 

combination of both to review the applications under this solicitation. An external peer 

reviewer is an expert in the field of the subject matter of a given solicitation who is NOT 

a current U.S. Department of Justice employee. An internal reviewer is an expert in the 

field of the subject matter of a given solicitation who is a current U.S. Department of 

Justice employee. Applications will be screened initially to determine whether the 

applicant meets all eligibility requirements. Only applications submitted by eligible 

applicants that meet all other requirements (such as timeliness, proper format, and 

responsiveness to the scope of the solicitation) will be evaluated, scored, and rated by a 

peer review panel. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are 

advisory only. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations may include, but are not 

limited to, underserved populations, strategic priorities, past performance, and available 

funding. 

After the peer review is finalized, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), in 

consultation with NIJ, conducts a financial review of all potential discretionary awards 

and cooperative agreements to evaluate the fiscal integrity and financial capability of 

applicants; examines proposed costs to determine if the budget and budget narrative 

accurately explain project costs; and determines whether costs are reasonable, 

necessary, and allowable under applicable Federal cost principles and agency 

regulations. OCFO also reviews the award document and verifies the OJP Vendor 

Number. 

15
 
When awards will be made: All applicants, whether they are accepted or rejected, will 

be notified. The review and approval process takes about 6 months. You should not 

propose to begin work until at least 6 months after the application deadline on the cover 

of this solicitation. Also, you should not expect to receive notification of a decision for at 

least 6 months after that date. Lists of awards are updated regularly on NIJ’s Web site at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/funding/welcome.htm. 

Absent explicit statutory authorization or written delegation of authority to the contrary, 

all final grant award decisions will be made by the Assistant Attorney General (AAG), 

who may also give consideration to factors including, but not limited to, underserved 

populations, strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding when making 

awards. 

Additional Requirements 

Successful applicants selected for award must agree to comply with additional 

requirements prior to receiving grant funding. We strongly encourage you to review the 

list below pertaining to these additional requirements prior to submitting your application. 

Additional information for each can be found at 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

• Civil Rights Compliance 

• Funding to Faith-Based Organizations 

• Confidentiality and Human Subjects Protection 

• Anti-Lobbying Act 

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements 

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

• DOJ Information Technology Standards 

• Single Point of Contact Review 

• Nonsupplanting of State or Local Funds 

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements 

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/ 

• Suspension or Termination of Funding 

• Nonprofit Organizations 

• For-Profit Organizations 

16
 
• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

• Rights in Intellectual Property 

• Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) 

If your proposal is funded, you will be required to submit several reports and other 

materials, including: 

Final substantive report: The final report should be a comprehensive overview of the 

project and should include, among other things, a detailed description of the project 

design, data, and methods; a full presentation of scientific findings; and a thorough 

discussion of the implications of the project findings for criminal justice practice and 

policy in the United States. It must contain an abstract of no more than 600 words and 

an executive summary of 2,500 to 4,000 words. 

A draft of the final report, abstract, and executive summary must be submitted 90 days 

before the end date of the grant. The draft final report will be peer reviewed upon 

submission. The reviews will be forwarded to the principal investigator with suggestions 

for revisions. The author must then submit the revised final report, abstract, and 

executive summary by the end date of the grant. The abstract, executive summary, and 

final report must be submitted in both paper and electronic formats. 

For program evaluation studies, the final report should include a section on measuring 

program performance. This section should outline the measures used to evaluate 

program effectiveness, modifications made to those measures as a result of the 

evaluation, and recommendations regarding these and other potential performance 

measures for similar programs. (This information will be particularly valuable to NIJ and 

other Federal program agencies in implementing performance measures for federally 

funded criminal justice programs.) 

Interim reports: Grantees must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual progress 

reports, a final progress report, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in accordance 

with Office of Management and Budget Circular A–133. Future awards and fund 

drawdowns may be withheld if reports are delinquent. 

Data sets: NIJ requires submission of all data sets (original, intermediate, and final) 

produced or collected for the project, and any artifact associated with the project data. 

Included with the final sets of data should be the plan outlined in the Data Archiving 

Strategy section of the proposal. 

17