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

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 pleased to announce that it is seeking applications for funding to examine issues 

related to the criminal justice system, specifically events that occur post-arrest. 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: 

Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems

Eligibility

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

agreements with, States (including territories), units of local government (including federallyrecognized Indian tribal governments as determined by the Secretary of the Interior), nonprofit 

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

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

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

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

to apply. 

Deadline 

Registration with Grants.gov is required prior to application submission. (See “How to 

Apply,” page 9.) 

All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 17, 2011. (See “Deadlines: 

Registration and Application,” page 3.) 

Contact Information 

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

Support Hotline at 800–518–4726 or via e-mail to support@grants.gov.

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

except Federal holidays. 

For assistance with any other requirement of this solicitation, contact Marilyn C. Moses, Social 

Science Analyst, for the impact of incarceration on families and for prison closings, at 202–514–

6205 or by e-mail to Marilyn.Moses@usdoj.gov; or Laurie Bright, Senior Social Science Analyst, 

for research on automated reporting systems, at 202–616–3624 or by e-mail to 

Laurie.Bright@usdoj.gov. 

Grants.gov number assigned to announcement: NIJ–2011–2825

SL# 000967 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 2 

CONTENTS 

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

Deadlines: Registration and Application......................................................................... 3 

Eligibility.................................................................................................................. 3 

Program-Specific Information....................................................................................... 3 

Performance Measures............................................................................................... 8 

Notice of New Post-Award Reporting Requirements......................................................... 9 

How to Apply............................................................................................................ 9 

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

Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance, Standard Form (SF) 

424................................................................................................... 12 

Program Narrative..........................................................................................12 

Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative.................................................... 14 

Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)...................................................... 15 

Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)......................................................... 15 

Other Standard Forms.................................................................................... 15 

Selection Criteria................................................................................................... 16 

Review Process.......................................................................................................17 

Additional Requirements........................................................................................... 18 

Application Checklist.................................................................................................20 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 3 

Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems 

(CFDA 16.560) 

Overview 

This solicitation seeks proposals to examine topics relevant to State and/or local criminal and 

juvenile justice systems policy and practice. Specific focus areas under this solicitation for Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2011 include: a multi-State study on the impact of incarceration on families of adults 

confined to penal institutions; a national study on State budget shortfalls and prison closings; 

and multi-jurisdiction research on automated reporting systems and kiosk supervision. 

Application titles should clearly denote the specific focus area selected. 

Applications addressing other areas of research related to criminal and/or juvenile justice 

systems policy and practice also may be considered. However, applicants are strongly 

encouraged to consider NIJ’s stated priority areas as they are outlined in this solicitation.

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

(sections 201 and 202). 

Deadlines: Registration and Application 

Registration is required prior to submission. OJP strongly encourages registering with 

Grants.gov several weeks before the deadline for application submission. The deadline for 

applying for funding under this announcement is 11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 17, 2011. 

Please see the “How to Apply” section, page 9, for more details. 

Eligibility 

Please refer to the title page for eligibility under this program. 

Program-Specific Information—Research and Evaluation in Justice 

Systems

A Multi-State Study on the Impact of Incarceration on Families of Adults Confined to 

Penal Institutions 

NIJ solicits a multi-State study (minimum of four States examined in a single study) on the 

impact of incarceration on families of adults confined to penal institutions using data those 

institutions and other organizations gather during day-to-day operations, such as administrative 

or other data sources or collection methods. NIJ is especially interested in data collected from 

States with distinctly different racial and ethnic demographics. Relatively little is known about 

the impact of incarceration on families of adults confined to penal institutions. Additionally, 

families of adults confined to penal institutions typically have, or have had, contact with systems 

other than the criminal justice system, such as juvenile justice, mental health, public health, 

child welfare, and education systems. Families’ involvement in these systems is of significant 

research and policy interest to the criminal justice field. Operational or administrative datasets 

provide a cost-effective opportunity to explore intersections among the various systems and the 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 4 

 

criminal justice implications of those intersections, including for crime prevention. Understanding 

involvement in and use of these systems could enhance coordination and efficiency, improve 

criminal justice outcomes, and generate valuable information for criminal justice researchers, 

policymakers, and practitioners. 

Administrative data (principally State-level data) or other data sources should be analyzed to 

explore the impact of incarceration on the families of adults confined to penal institutions. 

Factors that may be explored include: individual and family characteristics; child maltreatment; 

school stability and academic performance; the role of child placement; the role and 

interventions of social welfare systems within families; offender and family involvement in 

medical or mental health systems; offender rehabilitation and reunification with the family; and 

offender employment outcomes. 

The successful applicant will be expected to produce a variety of audience-specific research 

and policy briefs, as well as their recommendations for criminal justice practice, based on study 

findings. Other standard deliverables described in this solicitation apply. 

A National Study on State Budget Shortfalls and Prison Closings

The corrections system in the United States has experienced an unprecedented expansion 

during the last few decades, with a more than 400 percent jump in the prison population and a 

corresponding growth in institutional construction. At the end of 2008, 2.3 million adults were in 

Federal, State, and local custody, with another 5.1 million on probation and parole. This historic 

rise in incarceration has had broad implications, not just for the criminal justice system, but for 

the larger economy. At the end of 2008, about 770,000 people worked in the corrections sector. 

From 1982 to 2002, Federal and State spending on corrections, not adjusted for inflation, rose 

by 423 percent, from $40 to $209 per U.S. resident. Corrections spending as a share of State 

budgets rose faster than health care, education, and natural resources spending from 1986 to 

2001.1

 This growth of corrections has also had other impacts. 

State correctional systems are in stress—some States have found that they have overbuilt and 

some institutions are now underused.2

 Others have encountered massive budget shortfalls, 

intensified by the recession that began at the end of 2007. At least 26 States cut corrections 

spending for FY 2010. This has resulted in dramatic fiscal cutbacks necessitating layoffs, 

furloughs, releasing nonviolent prisoners, changing sentencing laws, releasing geriatric and 

chronically ill offenders to reduce health care costs, selling public correctional institutions to 

private firms, prison renovations, and prison closings. 

NIJ seeks a national3

 study on prison closings and alternative strategies employed by State 

correctional systems for dealing with massive State budget shortfalls. Factors that may be 

explored include: 

1

 Suzanne M. Kirchhoff, Economic Impacts of Prison Growth, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 

2010. 2

 Ibid. 

3

 Defined as having national implications; applicants may propose methods that involve all 50 States or nationally 

representative samples. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 5 

 

• Impacts on Institutional Operations. 

- Changes in institutional programming 

- Specific populations, such as geriatric and chronically ill offenders, offenders with 

mental illnesses, and female offenders 

- Inmate transfers between institutions 

- Institutional crowding and violence 

- Furloughs, layoffs, and other human resource impacts (e.g., inmate and corrections 

staff safety) 

• Impacts on Policy. 

- Public safety (e.g., potential surges in criminal offending, arrests resulting from 

releases of inmates) 

- Sentencing policy changes 

- Criteria for and scope of inmate release 

- Changes in contracting strategies or policies 

• Impacts on Probation and Parole Agencies. 

- Probation and parole caseloads 

The successful applicant will assess the short-term public safety and economic impacts of 

prison closings on State corrections systems and will propose a research design to assess the 

long-term impact on State corrections systems, especially in those States that have closed 

prisons in order to deal with fiscal crises or declining corrections populations. Other standard 

deliverables described in this solicitation apply. 

Multi-Jurisdiction Research on Automated Reporting Systems: Kiosk Supervision 

NIJ seeks research to identify effective and cost efficient supervision practices in community 

corrections. Specifically, applications are solicited for funding to support one or more awards 

that will examine kiosk automated reporting systems in the United States. Each research 

proposal should include at least several kiosk systems that are funded through different 

jurisdictions so that the information collected will provide the supervision field with a more varied 

picture than previous studies that looked at only one kiosk system. Applicants are expected to 

explain how they chose the particular kiosk systems that appear in their proposal and to provide 

letters of support from the supervision offices responsible for these kiosk systems. 

Kiosk supervision has been implemented in a number of jurisdictions, but no research has 

examined implementation, cost effectiveness, impact, and outcomes of this supervision strategy 

beyond single-State or jurisdiction assessments.4

 Although a few assessments of kiosk 

reporting suggest these systems can improve offender outcomes and save resources for 

corrections agency supervision offices, more comprehensive and rigorous research and 

evaluation is needed across multiple jurisdictions. 

This research project has two objectives. The first objective is to conduct an implementation and 

cost effectiveness assessment of each kiosk system. The resulting information will provide the 

4

 Rosalyn Baker. December 2007. Automated Kiosk Reporting For Offenders. FL: Unpublished document; pp. 1–13. 

www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/01da8494-55f5-4045-b20d-ac42503724af/Baker-rosalyn-final-paper.aspx; Ed 

Rarick and Randall M. Kahan. August 2009. On Prison Kiosks, Inmates Learn Job Search Skills. Corrections Today

71(3): 32–37. American Correctional Association.; James A. Wilson, Wendy Naro, and James F. Austin. July 2007. 

Innovations In Probation: Assessing New York City’s Automated Reporting System. Washington, DC: The JFA 

Institute. www.nyc.gov/html/prob/downloads/pdf/kiosk_report_2007.pdf. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 6 

basis for a practical guidebook that other jurisdictions may use in making decisions about 

whether to adopt a kiosk supervision system. NIJ expects implementation and cost 

effectiveness assessments to include information about: 

• Costs to train personnel who will use this technology and what types of training may be 

needed. The guidebook should suggest the amount and type of resources that are 

needed for training and support. 

• Real or possible compatibility issues between various kiosk systems and corrections 

agencies’ databases. 

• Cost considerations, such as how much money will be required up front for kiosk 

hardware, the amount of fees that can realistically be collected from offenders to support 

the kiosk system, and how much money will be saved by the agency over time. 

The second objective is to compare, in each kiosk system, the impact and outcome of this tool 

on offenders assigned to this supervision strategy versus those offenders who are not assigned 

to kiosk supervision. NIJ expects the impact and outcome assessment to include findings about: 

• Offenders’ employment and housing stability. 

• Probation/parole violations and other recidivism measures. 

• Extent to which kiosks free corrections officers’ time for other tasks. 

• Extent to which particular kiosk functions might be effective for use with high risk 

offenders. 

• Extent to which specific kiosk features are needed to deal with special populations, such 

as sex offenders. 

Applicants should read the section of this solicitation titled “Evaluation research,” below, for 

additional considerations in developing methods for their proposed study. 

Deliverables expected at the conclusion of this research project include a practical guidebook of 

implementation and cost considerations for other jurisdictions to use when considering kiosk 

implementation, as well as a final technical report that addresses (for each jurisdiction and 

across jurisdictions) implementation, cost effectiveness, impact and outcome findings, and 

implications for the criminal justice field and future research endeavors. Applicants should 

suggest other dissemination vehicles, beyond the practical guidebook, for the findings resulting 

from this project. Other standard deliverables as described in this solicitation apply.

Amount and length of awards: NIJ anticipates that, for this solicitation, up to $1 million may 

become available for one award under a multi-state study on the impact of incarceration on 

families of adults confined to penal institutions; up to $1 million may become available for one 

award under a national study on state budget shortfalls and prison closings; and up to $1 million 

may become available for one or more awards under multi-jurisdiction research on automated 

reporting systems: kiosk supervision. All awards are subject to the availability of 

appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements that may be 

imposed by law.

 

Applicants should be aware that the total period for an award ordinarily will not exceed 3 years. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 7 

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 such 

as Propensity Score Matching or 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 of services that 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 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 www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

What will not be funded: 

1. Provision of training or direct service. 

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

4. Proposals that do not contain a research component or do not respond to the specific 

goals of this solicitation. 

Budget Information 

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver: With respect to 

any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation, Federal funds may not be used 

to pay total cash compensation (salary plus bonuses) to any employee of the award recipient at 

a rate that exceeds 110% of the maximum annual salary payable to a member of the Federal 

Government’s Senior Executive Service (SES) at an agency with a Certified SES Performance 

Appraisal System for that year. (The 2010 salary table for SES employees is available at 

www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/indexSES.asp.) Note: A recipient may compensate an employee at 

a higher rate, provided the amount in excess of this compensation limitation is paid with nonFederal funds. (Any such additional compensation will not be considered matching funds where 

match requirements apply.) 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 8 

The limitation on compensation rates allowable under an award may be waived on an individual 

basis at the discretion of the Director of the National Institute of Justice. An applicant that 

wishes to request a waiver must include a detailed justification in the budget narrative of its 

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

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

budget. 

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

uniqueness of the service being provided, the individual’s specific knowledge of the program or 

project being undertaken with award funds, and a statement explaining that the individual’s 

salary is commensurate with the regular and customary rate for an individual with his/her 

qualifications and expertise, and for the work that is to be done. 

Match Requirement: See “Cofunding” paragraph under “What an Application Should Include” 

(below). 

Performance Measures 

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

Results Act (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation 

must provide data that measure the results of their work. Any award recipient will be required, 

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

can calculate values for the “Performance Measures” column. Performance measures for this 

solicitation are as follows: 

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides 

Develop and analyze 

information and data 

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 

grantee’s substantive scope did 

not deviate from the funded 

proposal or any subsequent 

agency modifications to the 

scope. 

2. Quality of the research as 

assessed by peer reviewers. 

3. Quality of management as 

measured by whether significant 

interim project milestones were 

achieved, final deadlines were 

met, and costs remained within 

approved limits. 

4. If applicable, number of NIJ final 

grant reports, NIJ research 

documents, and grantee 

research documents published. 

1. 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 in the 

United States. 

2. Quarterly financial reports, semiannual progress reports, and a 

final progress report. 

3. If applicable, each data set that 

was collected, acquired, or 

modified in conjunction with the 

project. 

4. If applicable, citation to 

report(s)/document(s).
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 9 

Submission of performance measures data is not required for the application. Instead, 

applicants should discuss in their applications their proposed methods for collecting data for 

performance measures. Please refer to the section “What an Application Should Include” 

(below) for additional information. 

Note on project evaluations: Applicants that propose to use funds awarded through this 

solicitation to conduct project evaluations should be aware that certain project evaluations (such 

as systematic investigations designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge) may 

constitute “research” for purposes of applicable DOJ human subjects provisions. However, 

project evaluations that are intended only to generate internal improvements to a program or 

service, or are conducted only to meet OJP’s performance measure data reporting 

requirements, likely do not constitute “research.” Applicants should provide sufficient information 

for OJP to determine whether the particular project they propose would either intentionally or 

unintentionally collect and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ regulatory 

definition of research. 

Research, for the purposes of human subjects protections for OJP-funded programs, is defined 

as, “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, 

designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge.” 28 C.F.R. § 46.102(d). For 

additional information on determining whether a proposed activity would constitute research, 

see the decision tree to assist applicants on the “Research and the Protection of Human 

Subjects” section of the OJP “Other Requirements for OJP Applications” Web page 

(www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm). Applicants whose proposals may involve 

a research of statistical component also should review the “Confidentiality” section on that Web 

page. 

Notice of New Post-Award Reporting Requirements 

Applicants should anticipate that all recipients (other than individuals) of awards of $25,000 or 

more under this solicitation, consistent with the Federal Funding Accountability and 

Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), will be required to report award information on any first-tier 

subawards totaling $25,000 or more, and, in certain cases, to report information on the names 

and total compensation of the five most highly compensated executives of the recipient and 

first-tier subrecipients. Each applicant entity must ensure that it has the necessary processes 

and systems in place to comply with the reporting requirements should it receive funding. 

Reports regarding subawards will be made through the FFATA Subaward Reporting System 

(FSRS), found at www.fsrs.gov. 

Please note also that applicants should anticipate that no subaward of an award made under 

this solicitation may be made to a subrecipient (other than an individual) unless the potential 

subrecipient acquires and provides a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. 

How to Apply 

Applications will be submitted through Grants.gov. Grants.gov is a “one-stop storefront” that 

provides a unified process for all customers of Federal awards to find funding opportunities and 

apply for funding. Complete instructions on how to register and submit an application can be 

found at www.Grants.gov. If the applicant experiences technical difficulties at any point during 

this process, please call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800–518–4726, 24 hours 

a day, 7 days a week, except Federal holidays. Registering with Grants.gov is a one-time 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 10 

process; however, processing delays may occur, and it can take up to several weeks for 

first-time registrants to receive confirmation and a user password. OJP highly recommends that 

applicants start the registration process as early as possible to prevent delays in submitting an 

application package by the specified application deadline. 

All applicants are required to complete the following steps:

 

1. Acquire a DUNS number. A DUNS number is required for Grants.gov registration. In 

general, the Office of Management and Budget requires that all applicants (other than 

individuals) for Federal funds include a DUNS (Data Universal Numbering System) 

number in their applications for a new award or renewal of an existing award. A DUNS 

number is a unique nine-digit 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, one-time activity. 

Obtain a DUNS number by calling Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 or by applying 

online at www.dnb.com. Individuals are exempt from this requirement. 

2. Acquire or renew registration with the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) 

database. OJP requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for Federal financial 

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

database. An applicant must be registered in the CCR to successfully register in 

Grants.gov. 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 registration annually to maintain an active status. 

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

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

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

username and password. The applicant organization’s DUNS Number must be used to 

complete this step. For more information about the registration process, go to 

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

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

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

the applicant organization’s AOR. Please note that there can be more than one AOR for 

the organization. 

5. Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov. Please use the following 

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

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for this solicitation is 16.560, 

titled “National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development Project 

Grants,” and the funding opportunity number is NIJ–2011–2825.

6. Submit an 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 an e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The validation 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 11 

message will state whether the application has been received and validated, or rejected, 

with an explanation. Important: Applicants are urged to submit applications 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 a rejection notification. 

Note: Grants.gov will forward the application to OJP’s Grants Management System 

(GMS). 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.”

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues 

If an applicant experiences unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond the applicant’s 

control that prevent submission of its application by the deadline, the applicant must contact NIJ 

staff within 24 hours after the deadline and request approval to submit its application. At that 

time, NIJ staff will instruct the applicant to submit specific information detailing the technical 

difficulties. The applicant must e-mail: a description of the technical difficulties, a timeline of 

submission efforts, the complete grant application, the applicant DUNS number, and Grants.gov 

Help Desk tracking number(s) received. After the program office reviews all of the information 

submitted, and contacts the Grants.gov Help Desk to validate the technical issues reported, 

OJP will contact the applicant to either approve or deny the request to submit a late application. 

If the technical issues reported cannot be validated, the application will be rejected as untimely. 

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 Web 

site, (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. 

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

of the OJP funding Web page, www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/solicitations.htm. 

What an Application Should Include 

This section describes what an application should include and sets out a number of elements. 

Applicants should anticipate that failure to submit an application that contains all of the specified 

elements may negatively affect the review of the application; and, should a decision be made to 

make an award, it may result in the inclusion of special conditions that preclude access to or 

use of award funds pending satisfaction of the conditions. 

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that some application elements are so critical that 

applications unresponsive to the scope of the solicitation, or that do not include a program 

narrative, budget detail worksheet including a budget narrative, and resumes/curriculum vitae of 

key personnel will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. 

OJP strongly recommends use of appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., “Program 

Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative,” “Timelines,” “Memoranda of 

Understanding,” “Resumes”) for all attachments. OJP recommends that resumes be included in 

a single file. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 12 

1. Information to complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF–424) 

The SF–424 is a standard form required for use as a cover sheet for submission of preapplications, applications, and related information. Grants.gov and 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, please select "For-Profit Organization" or 

"Small Business" (as applicable). 

2. Program Narrative 

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

pages in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. Abstract, table of contents, charts, figures, 

appendices, and government forms do not count toward the 30-page limit for the 

narrative section. 

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

noncompliance may be considered in peer review and in final award decisions. 

Program Narrative Guidelines: 

a. Title Page (not counted against the 30-page program narrative limit). 

The title page should include the title of the project, submission date, funding 

opportunity number, and the applicant’s name and complete contact information 

(i.e., name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address). 

b. Project Abstract (not counted against the 30-page program narrative limit). 

The 400 to 600-word abstract should state the problem under investigation 

(including research goals and objectives) and the anticipated relevance of the 

project to criminal justice public policy, practice, or theory. It should describe the 

proposed method and/or research design, including data to be used in 

addressing research 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, and devices. 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. 

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

narrative limit). If an applicant is resubmitting a proposal that was presented 

previously to NIJ, but not funded, the applicant should indicate this. A statement 

should be provided, no more than two pages, addressing: (1) the title, 

submission date, and NIJ-assigned application number of the previous proposal, 

and (2) a brief summary of revisions to the proposal. This document should be 

inserted after the abstract. 

d. Table of Contents and Figures (not counted against the 30-page program 

narrative limit). 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 13 

e. Main body. The main body of the program narrative should describe the project 

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

narrative: 

• Statement of the Problem. 

• Project/Program Design and Implementation. 

• Capabilities/Competencies. 

• Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation. 

• Plan for Collecting the Data Required for This Solicitation’s 

Performance Measures. Note: Submission of performance measures 

data is not required for the application. Performance measures are 

included as an alert that successful applicants will be required to 

submit specific data to NIJ as part of their reporting requirements. For 

the application, the applicant should indicate an understanding of 

these requirements and discuss how the applicant will gather the 

required data, should the applicant receive funding. 

• Dissemination Strategy. 

Note: Within these sections, the narrative should address: 

• Purpose, goals, and objectives. 

• Review of relevant literature. 

• Detailed description of research design and methods to include: 

research questions, hypotheses, description of sample, analysis plan, 

etc. 

• Implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the United 

States. 

• Management plan and organization. 

f. Appendices (not counted against the 30-page program narrative limit) include: 

• Bibliography/references. 

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

pertaining to the proposed study. 

• Curriculum vitae, resumes or biographical sketches of key personnel. 

• Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones. 

• Research independence and integrity (see “Selection Criteria,” 

below). 

• Human Subjects Protection Paperwork including Institutional Review 

Board (IRB) documentation and forms (see 

www.ojp.gov/nij/funding/humansubjects/human-subjects.htm). 

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to 

www.ojp.gov/nij/funding/humansubjects/privacy-certificateguidance.htm). 

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

investigator(s). 

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement 

and correctional agencies (if applicable). 

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

proposal has been submitted (if applicable). 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 14 

• Other materials specified by the solicitation. 

• Data Archiving Strategy (see descriptive paragraph below).

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.) Applicants for NIJ research grants are 

strongly encouraged to 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 should 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.” 

3. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative 

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at 

www.ojp.gov/funding/forms/budget_detail.pdf. If the budget is submitted in a different 

format, the budget categories listed in the sample budget worksheet should be 

included. 

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

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

b. Budget Narrative 

The Budget Narrative should thoroughly and clearly describe every category of 

expense listed in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should be 

mathematically sound and correspond with the information and figures provided in 

the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how all costs were 

estimated and calculated and how they are relevant to the completion of the 

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

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

Budget Narrative should be broken down by year. 

Cofunding: A grant 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 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 15 

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. 

4. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) 

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

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

approval should be attached. If the applicant does not have an approved rate, one can 

be requested by contacting the applicant’s cognizant Federal agency, which will review 

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

accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost categories. If DOJ 

is the cognizant Federal agency, obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost 

rate proposal at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/financialguide/part3/part3chap17.htm.

5. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

If an application is being submitted by either (1) a tribe or tribal organization or (2) a third 

party proposing to provide direct services or assistance to residents on tribal lands, then 

a current authorizing resolution of the governing body of the tribal entity or other 

enactment of the tribal council or comparable governing body authorizing the inclusion of 

the tribe or tribal organization and its membership should be included with the 

application. In those instances when an organization or consortium of tribes proposes to 

apply for a grant on behalf of a tribe or multiple specific tribes, then the application 

should include a resolution from all tribes that will be included as a part of the 

services/assistance provided under the grant. A consortium of tribes for which existing 

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

without authorizing resolution or other enactment of each tribal governing body) may 

submit a copy of its consortium bylaws with the application in lieu of tribal resolutions. 

6. Other Standard Forms

Additional forms that may be required in connection with an award are available on 

OJP’s funding page at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/forms.htm. For successful applicants, 

receipt of funds may be contingent upon submission of all necessary forms. Please note 

in particular the following forms. 

a. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other

Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (required to 

be submitted in GMS prior to the receipt of any award funds) 

b. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (required for any applicant that expends any 

funds for lobbying activities; this form must be downloaded, completed, and 

then uploaded) 

c. Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (required for any 

applicant other than an individual that is a non-governmental entity and that 

has not received any award from OJP within the past 3 years; this form must 

be downloaded, completed, and then uploaded) 

d. Standard Assurances (required to be submitted in GMS prior to the receipt of 

any award funds) 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 16 

Selection Criteria 

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

Project/Program Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit)—25%

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

2. Soundness of methods 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)—15%

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—20% 

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)—20% 

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 

in the United States and improving public safety, security, and quality of life. 

4. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed products, when applicable (e.g., 

purchase price and maintenance costs for a new technology or cost of training to use the 

technology). 

Relevance of the project for policy and practice in the United States

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. The application may include letters showing 

support from practitioners, but they carry less weight than clear evidence of the applicant’s 

understanding of how policymakers and practitioners can best use and benefit from the 

proposed work. While a partnership may affect State or local activities, it should also have 

broader implications for other communities nationwide. 

Dissemination Strategy—10% 

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

including researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. 

 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 17 

 2. Suggestions for print and electronic products NIJ should consider developing for 

practitioners and policymakers. 

3. If applicable, a clear strategy leading to the adoption into practice of any equipment or 

software. 

Research Independence and Integrity 

Regardless of a proposal’s rating under the criteria outlined above, in order to receive funds, the 

applicant’s proposal must demonstrate research independence, including appropriate 

safeguards to ensure research objectivity and integrity. 

For purposes of this solicitation, research independence and integrity pertains only to ensuring 

that the design, conduct, or reporting of research funded by NIJ grants, cooperative 

agreements, or contracts will not be biased by any financial interest on the part of the 

investigators responsible for the research or on the part of the applicant. 

In the appendix dealing with research independence and integrity, the applicant must explain 

the process and procedures that the applicant has put in place to identify and manage potential 

financial conflicts of interest on the part of its staff, consultants, and/or subrecipients. It must 

also identify any potential organizational financial conflicts of interest on the part of the applicant 

with regard to the proposed research. If the applicant believes that there are no potential 

organizational financial conflicts of interest, the applicant must provide a brief narrative 

explanation of why it believes that to be the case. 

Where potential organizational financial conflicts of interest exist, in the appendix the applicant 

must identify the safeguards the applicant has put in place to address those conflicts of interest. 

Considerations in evaluating research independence and integrity will include, but may not be 

limited to, the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify factors that could affect the 

objectivity/integrity of the proposed staff and/or the organization in carrying out the research, 

development, or evaluation activity; and the adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed 

remedies to control any such factors. 

Review Process 

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

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

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

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

minimum requirements. NIJ may use either internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or 

a combination 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 a current U.S. Department of Justice 

employee who is well-versed or has expertise in the subject matter of this solicitation. Eligible 

applications 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 for award recommendations and decisions may include, but are not limited to, 

underserved populations, geographic diversity, strategic priorities, past performance, and 

available funding. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 18 

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), in consultation with NIJ, conducts a financial 

review of applications for potential discretionary awards to evaluate the fiscal integrity and 

financial capability of applicants; examines proposed costs to determine if the budget detail 

worksheet and budget narrative accurately explain project costs; and determines whether costs 

are reasonable, necessary, and allowable under applicable Federal cost principles and agency 

regulations. 

All final award decisions will be made by the Director of the National Institute of Justice, who 

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

geographic diversity, strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding when making 

awards. 

Additional Requirements 

Applicants selected for awards must agree to comply with additional legal requirements upon 

acceptance of an award. OJP strongly encourages applicants to review the information 

pertaining to these additional requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional 

information for each requirement can be found at 

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

• Civil Rights Compliance 

• Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations 

• Confidentiality 

• Research and the Protection of Human Subjects 

• Anti-Lobbying Act 

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements 

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

• DOJ Information Technology Standards (if applicable) 

• Single Point of Contact Review 

• Non-Supplanting of State or Local Funds 

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements 

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide

• Suspension or Termination of Funding 

• Nonprofit Organizations 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 19 

• For-profit Organizations 

• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

• Rights in Intellectual Property 

• Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) of 2006 

• Awards in Excess of $5,000,000 – Federal Taxes Certification Requirement 

• Active CCR Registration 

If the proposal is funded, the award recipient 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 a detailed description of the project design, data, and methods; a full 

presentation of scientific findings, placed in the context of existing literature; a thorough 

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

United States; etc. 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 electronic 

format. 

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 funded 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. 
NIJ–2011–2825 

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 20 

Application Checklist 

Research and Evaluation in Justice Systems 

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

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF–424) (see page 12) 

_____ Program Narrative (see page 12) 

_____ Appendices to the Program Narrative (see page 13) 

_____ Bibliography/references 

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

pertaining to the proposed study 

_____ Curriculum vitae, resumes or biographical sketches of key personnel 

_____ Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones 

_____ Research independence and integrity 

_____ 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 

proposal has been submitted (if applicable) 

_____ Data Archiving Strategy 

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 14) 

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 14) 

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 15) 

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 15) 

_____ Program Narrative/Abstract Format (see page 12) 

_____ Double-spaced 

_____ 12-point standard font 

_____ 1” standard margins 

_____ Narrative is 30 pages or less 

_____ Other Standard Forms as applicable (see page 15), including: 

 _____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (if applicable) 

 _____ Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable)