Notices regarding the solicitation “Strengthening the Medical 

Examiner-Coroner System Program”

January 27, 2017: Answers to questions have been posted. To assist applicants in completing 

their proposals, NIJ has made the answers to questions received available for this funding 

opportunity. Visit https://nij.gov/funding/pages/solicitation-qa.aspx#NIJ-2017-11566 for 

questions and answers to help prepare your application.

The original solicitation document begins on the next page.
U.S. Department of Justice OMB No. 1121-0329 

Office of Justice Programs Approval Expires 12/31/2018 

National Institute of Justice 

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

Justice (NIJ) is seeking applications to strengthen the medical examiner-coroner system. This 

program furthers the Department’s mission by providing resources to improve medicolegal 

death investigations (MDI) in the United States. 

Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner 

System Program 

Applications Due: March 20, 2017 

Eligibility 

Eligible applicants are agencies directly involved in medicolegal death investigations as part of 

their normal business, such as medical examiner offices and coroner offices — States (including 

territories), units of local government, federally recognized Indian tribal governments (as 

determined by the Secretary of the Interior) that perform law enforcement functions, non-profit 

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

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

individuals. For-profit organizations (as well as other recipients) must forgo any profit or 

management fee including tribal institutions of higher education). 

Eligible applicants for Purpose Area 1, Forensic Pathology Fellowships, are limited to entities 

with programs that should meet or exceed the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical 

Education (ACGME)1 or its international equivalent’s requirements. 

Eligible applicants for Purpose Area 2, Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation, are 

limited to domestic medical examiner and coroner offices actively seeking accreditation through 

an independent accrediting organization, such as the National Association of Medical 

Examiners (NAME) and the International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners 

(IACME), or other appropriate accrediting bodies. 

NIJ welcomes applications under which two or more entities would carry out the federal award; 

however, only one entity may be the applicant. Any others must be proposed as subrecipients 

(“subgrantees").2

 The applicant must be the entity that would have primary responsibility for 

carrying out the award, including administering the funding and managing the entire program. 

NIJ may elect to fund applications submitted under this FY 2017 solicitation in future fiscal 

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

availability of appropriations. 

 

1 ACGME Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Forensic Pathology, 2016. 

2

 For additional information on subawards, see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application 

and Submission Information. 
NIJ-2017-11566

2

Deadline

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

due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 20, 2017.

To be considered timely, an application must be submitted by the application deadline using 

Grants.gov, and the applicant must have received a validation message from Grants.gov that 

indicates successful and timely submission. OJP urges applicants to submit applications at least 

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

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

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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

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

Information.

Contact Information

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Grants.gov number assigned to this solicitation: NIJ-2017-11566

Release date: January 9, 2017
NIJ-2017-11566

3

Contents

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

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

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

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables....................................................................................... 5

Evidence-Based Programs or Practices ................................................................................. 7

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

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

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

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

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

Pre-Agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs)........................................................ 9

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

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

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

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

D. Application and Submission Information...............................................................................10

What an Application Should Include......................................................................................10

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

E. Application Review Information.............................................................................................32

Review Criteria for Purpose Area 1 – Forensic Pathology Fellowships..................................32

Review Criteria for Purpose Area 2 – Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation..........34

Review Process ....................................................................................................................36

F. Federal Award Administration Information ............................................................................38

Federal Award Notices..........................................................................................................38

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements ............................................38

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements .............................39

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...................................................................................39

H. Other Information..................................................................................................................39

Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a)....................39

Provide Feedback to OJP .....................................................................................................40

Application Checklist .............................................................................................................41
NIJ-2017-11566

4

Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner 

System Program

CFDA No. 16.560

A. Program Description

Overview

With this solicitation, NIJ seeks proposals to strengthen the medical examiner/coroner (ME/C)

system in the United States. Through this program, NIJ will support grants in two focus areas 

by:

(1) supporting forensic pathology fellowships; and

(2) providing resources necessary to achieve accreditation.

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

(sections 201 and 202); Homeland Security Act of 2002 (sections 231-233); 28 U.S.C. 530C.

Program-Specific Information

The National Science and Technology Council’s Fast-Track Action Committee on Strengthening 

the Medicolegal-Death-Investigation System’s (FTAC-SMDIS) report titled Strengthening the 

Medicolegal-Death-Investigation System: Improving Data Systems notes that death 

investigations performed by ME/C offices are vital to criminal justice by investigating violent 

deaths. Of the estimated 2.6 million deaths annually, ME/C offices investigate nearly 500,000 

cases in approximately 2,400 jurisdictions. FTAC-SMDIS found that the ME/C community lacks 

adequate personnel and resources to address the country’s medicolegal death investigation 

(MDI) needs. In addition, FTAC-SMDIS reports that there are systemic issues with death 

investigation data quality and infrastructure, inadequate facilities, and inconsistent expertise 

levels.3 Other reports such as the 2009 National Academy of Sciences Report, Strengthening 

Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward have also asserted a need to address 

deficient facilities, equipment, staffing, education, and training for MDI.

Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner System is a competitive program designed to 

support the enhancement of MDI services and increase the supply of forensic pathologists 

nationwide. NIJ is seeking proposals in two purpose areas:

Purpose Area 1: Forensic Pathology Fellowships

Purpose Area 2: Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation

 

3 White House National Science and Technology Council report on Strengthening the Medicolegal Death 

Investigation System: Improving Data Systems. September 2016. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/strengthening_the_medicolegal_death_investiga

tion_system_final.pdf.
NIJ-2017-11566

5

Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables

The goals of the Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner System program are to:

1) increase the supply of qualified forensic pathology practitioners; and 

2) strengthen the quality and consistency of ME/C services.

Proposals are expected to clearly identify the purpose area to which they are applying.

Purpose Area 1: Forensic Pathology Fellowships

Competition ID: NIJ-2017-12060

Background: There is an extreme shortage of board-certified forensic pathologists in the United 

States,

4 as underscored in the 2009 report by the National Academies of Sciences on 

strengthening forensic science in the United States.5 This call was reaffirmed by several recent 

reports developed through national initiatives dedicated to improve the quality and practice of

forensic sciences. Both the National Commission on Forensic Science6 and the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy, Fast-Track Action Committee on Strengthening the 

Medicolegal Death Investigation System7recommended investments in workforce development 

initiatives for forensic pathologists in order to increase their quantity and thereby support the 

medicolegal death investigation needs of our nation.

8

Board-certified forensic pathologists are physicians who have completed, at a minimum, four 

years of medical school and three-to-four years of medical specialty training in anatomical 

pathology or anatomical and clinical pathology, followed by an accredited fellowship year in 

forensic pathology. Forensic pathology fellowships provide specialized training in autopsies and 

death scene investigations under direct supervision by a board-certified forensic pathologist, as 

well as general training in courtroom testimony, criminalistics, anthropology, odontology, 

toxicology, research techniques, and other forensic science-related specialties.

9

Through this funding opportunity, applications are being solicited from institutions with ACGMEaccredited forensic pathology fellowship programs to recruit quality candidates who have 

completed all necessary medical education and pathology residency requirements. This 

 

4 National Commission on Forensic Science Increasing the Number, Retention, and Quality of Board-Certified 

Forensic Pathologists, August 2015 https://www.justice.gov/ncfs/file/641646/download.

5 National Research Council. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Washington, DC: 

The National Academies Press, 2009. doi:10.17226/12589. https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12589/strengtheningforensic-science-in-the-united-states-a-path-forward.

6DOJ National Commission on Forensic Science. https://www.justice.gov/ncfs.

7 Views on Increasing the Number, Retention, and Quality of Board-Certified Forensic Pathologists. DOJ National 

Commission on Forensic Science. August 11, 2015. https://www.justice.gov/ncfs/file/787356/download.

8 White House National Science and Technology Council report on Strengthening the Medicolegal Death 

Investigation System: Improving Data Systems. September 2016. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/strengthening_the_medicolegal_death_investiga

tion_system_final.pdf.

9 National Research Council, 256.
NIJ-2017-11566

6

program will strengthen the ME/C system by increasing the number and quality of boardcertified forensic pathologists.

Agencies that are awarded funds under this purpose area will be required to provide information 

to NIJ, generally in the form of semi-annual progress reports, throughout the duration of the 

award. These reports should describe all relevant progress, including any issues encountered 

and/or successes achieved. Awardees are encouraged to report to NIJ any additional 

information about the fellowship program that may assist NIJ to better serve the MDI

community.

Purpose Area 2: Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation

Competition ID: NIJ-2017-12061

Background: Accreditation provides an independent measure of quality assurance by assessing 

that an office maintains written policies and procedures, and adequate staff, equipment, training, 

and suitable physical facilities to produce a forensically-documented, accurate, and credible 

death investigation product.10,11 The National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME)12 and 

the International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners (IACME)13 are examples of 

accrediting bodies that publish professional standards on procedures for conducting autopsies 

and medicolegal death investigations.

Through this funding opportunity, applications are being solicited from ME/C agencies seeking 

accreditation through an appropriate ME/C accrediting agency. This program will strengthen the 

quality of ME/C services in the United States by ensuring that agencies performing postmortem 

examinations are in compliance with industry and professional standards and performance 

criteria.

Agencies that are awarded funds under this purpose area will be required to provide information 

to NIJ, generally in the form of semi-annual progress reports, throughout the duration of the 

award. NIJ is interested in, among other things, understanding the advantages and challenges 

with implementing an accreditation program, especially when resources and policies vary 

among jurisdictions. Reports should address progress made in achieving accreditation and, for 

example, costs, benefits, and other technical, administrative, policy, or legal gaps that support, 

sustain, or limit the achievement of accreditation.

 

10 Recommendation on the Accreditation of Medicolegal Death Investigation Offices. DOJ National Commission on 

Forensic Science. January 30, 2015. https://www.justice.gov/ncfs/file/787236/download.

11 National Research Council. Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Washington, 

DC: The National Academies Press, 2009. doi:10.17226/12589, p.258. 

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12589/strengthening-forensic-science-in-the-united-states-a-path-forward.

12 National Association of Medical Examiners. Inspection and Accreditation. 

https://netforum.avectra.com/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?Site=name&WebCode=Accred (Last accessed October 4, 

2016).

13 International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners. Accreditation. 

http://www.theiacme.com/accreditation (Last accessed October 4, 2016).
NIJ-2017-11566

7

The Goals, Objectives and Deliverables are directly related to the performance measures set 

out in the table in Section D. Application and Submission Information, under "Program 

Narrative."

Evidence-Based Programs or Practices

OJP strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program 

development in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. OJP is committed to:

 Improving the quantity and quality of evidence OJP generates.

 Integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the 

field.

 Improving the translation of evidence into practice.

OJP considers programs and practices to be evidence-based when their effectiveness has been 

demonstrated by causal evidence, generally obtained through one or more outcome 

evaluations. Causal evidence documents a relationship between an activity or intervention 

(including technology) and its intended outcome, including measuring the direction and size of a 

change, and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention. 

Causal evidence depends on the use of scientific methods to rule out, to the extent possible, 

alternative explanations for the documented change. The strength of causal evidence, based on 

the factors described above, will influence the degree to which OJP considers a program or 

practice to be evidence-based. The OJP CrimeSolutions.gov website is one resource that 

applicants may use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, 

juvenile justice, and crime victim services.

B. Federal Award Information

Total funding for this solicitation and the number of awards made will depend on the availability 

of funds, the quality of the applications, and other pertinent factors. NIJ expects to award up to 

$4 million under the FY 2017 Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner System Program to

institutions that administer an accredited forensic pathology fellowship program, and to state 

and local ME/C offices actively seeking accreditation. NIJ expects to make up to ten (10) oneyear forensic pathology fellowship awards of $100,000 each under Purpose Area 1 of this 

solicitation. Funds may be used toward a salary/stipend for the fellow and related costs that may 

include fringe benefits (if applicable), at the applicant institution’s discretion. Up to $25,000, of 

the $100,000, may be used for other related direct or indirect costs. Related costs may include 

any combination of the fellow’s fees, project costs, professional society membership fees, or 

conference travel, among other allowable expenses incurred during the award period of 

performance. Under Purpose Area 2, NIJ expects to make awards to support ME/C office 

accreditation with an estimated total amount awarded up to $3,000,000. NIJ expects to make 

awards for a 24-month period of performance, to begin on January 1, 2018.

NIJ may elect to make multiple awards to a single host institution, and, in certain cases, provide 

additional funding in future years to awards made under this solicitation, through supplemental 

awards. In making decisions regarding supplemental awards, OJP will consider, among other 

factors, the availability of appropriations, OJP’s strategic priorities, and OJP’s assessment of 
NIJ-2017-11566

8

both the management of the award (for example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), 

and the progress of the work funded under the award.

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

additional requirements that may be imposed by law.

Type of Award

NIJ expects that any award under this solicitation will be made in the form of a grant. See 

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

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

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

Financial Management and System of Internal Controls

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

entities14) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements15 as set out at 2 C.F.R. 

200.303:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

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

Federal awards.

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

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

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

noncompliance identified in audit findings.

(e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable 

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

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

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

privacy and obligations of confidentiality.

 

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

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

15 The "Part 200 Uniform Requirements” means the DOJ regulation at 2 C.F.R Part 2800, which adopts (with certain 

modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200.
NIJ-2017-11566

9

To help ensure that applicants understand applicable administrative requirements and cost 

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

Financial Management Online Training, available here.

Budget Information

Cost Sharing or Match Requirement

This solicitation does not require a match. However, if a successful application proposes a 

voluntary match amount, and OJP approves the budget, the total match amount incorporated 

into the approved budget becomes mandatory and subject to audit.

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

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

performance of the federal award.

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

prior written approval of OJP for all such costs. All such costs incurred prior to award and prior 

to approval of the costs are incurred at the sole risk of the applicant. (Generally, no applicant 

should incur project costs before submitting an application requesting federal funding for those 

costs.) Should there be extenuating circumstances that make it appropriate for OJP to consider 

approving pre-agreement costs, the applicant may contact the point of contact listed on the title 

page of this solicitation for the requirements concerning written requests for approval. If 

approved in advance by OJP, award funds may be used for pre-agreement costs, consistent 

with the recipient’s approved budget and applicable cost principles. See the section on Costs 

Requiring Prior Approval in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide for more information.

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

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

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

employee of the recipient at a rate that exceeds 110% 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.16 The 2017 salary table for SES 

employees is available at the Office of Personnel Management website. Note: A recipient may 

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

limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Non-federal funds used for any such additional 

compensation will not be considered matching funds, where match requirements apply.) If only 

a portion of an employee's time is charged to an OJP award, the maximum allowable 

compensation is equal to the percentage of time worked times the maximum salary limitation.

The Assistant Attorney General for OJP may exercise discretion to waive, on an individual 

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

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

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

anticipate that OJP will require the applicant to adjust and resubmit the budget.

 

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

2 C.F.R. Part 200.
NIJ-2017-11566

10

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

meeting-, and training- costs for cooperative agreement recipients, as well as some 

conference-, meeting-, and training- costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, which 

include a general prohibition of all food and beverage costs.

Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

services, where appropriate.

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

Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements Awards” in the 

OJP Funding Resource Center.

C. Eligibility Information

For eligibility information, see the title page.

For information on cost sharing or match requirements, see Section B. Federal Award 

Information.

D. Application and Submission Information

What an Application Should Include

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

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

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

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

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

funds available.
NIJ-2017-11566

11

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

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

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

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

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

and resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel. An applicant may combine the Budget Narrative 

and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant submits only one 

budget document, it must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the “Note 

on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply (below) to be sure applications are 

submitted in permitted formats.

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

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

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

applicants include résumés in a single file.

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

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

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

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

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

To avoid processing delays, an applicant must include an accurate legal name on its SF424. Current OJP award recipients, when completing the field for “Legal Name” should use 

the same legal name that appears on the prior year award document which is also the legal 

name stored in OJP’s financial system. On the SF-424, enter the Legal Name in box 5 and 

Employer Identification Number (EIN) in box 6 exactly as it appears on the prior year award 

document. An applicant with a current, active award(s) must ensure that its GMS profile is 

current. If the profile is not current, the applicant should submit a Grant Adjustment Notice 

updating the information on its GMS profile prior to applying under this solicitation. 

A new applicant entity should enter the Official Legal Name and address of the applicant 

entity in box 5 and the EIN in box 6 of the SF-424. An applicant must attach official legal 

documents to its application (e.g., articles of incorporation, 501C3, etc.) to confirm the legal 

name, address, and EIN entered into the SF-424.

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

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

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

2. Project Abstract

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

to the proposed project. If the application is funded, the project abstract typically will become 

public information and be used to describe the project. Applications should include a highquality project abstract that summarizes the proposed project in 250-400 words. Project 

abstracts should be—
NIJ-2017-11566

12

 Written for a general public audience.

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

 Single-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (such as Times New Roman) with 1-inch 

margins.

As a separate attachment, the project abstract will not count against the 15-page limit for 

the program narrative.

All project abstracts should follow the detailed template available at 

ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/ProjectAbstractTemplate.pdf.

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

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

share information with the public regarding unfunded applications, for example, through a 

listing on a web page available to the public. The intent of this public posting would be to 

allow other possible funders to become aware of such applications.

In the project abstract template, each applicant is asked to indicate whether it gives OJP 

permission to share the applicant’s project abstract (including contact information for 

individuals) with the public. Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not affect OJP’s 

funding decisions. Moreover, if the application is not funded, providing permission will not 

ensure that OJP will share the abstract information, nor will it assure funding from any other 

source.

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

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

requirements noted above and outlined in the project abstract template.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative section of the application should not exceed 15 double-spaced pages 

in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. If included in the main body of the program narrative, 

tables, charts, figures, and other illustrations count toward the 15-page limit for the narrative 

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

count toward the 15-page limit.

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

consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions

a. Title Page (not counted against the 15-page program narrative limit)

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

opportunity number, name and complete contact information (that is, address, 

telephone number, and e-mail address) for the applicant organization and purpose 

area (Purpose Area 1: Forensic Pathology Fellowships or Purpose Area 2: Medical 

Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation).
NIJ-2017-11566

13

b. Main Body

The main body of the program narrative should describe the proposed project in 

depth, and how funds will be used to improve ME/C services and strengthen the 

ME/C system in the United States. The following sections should be included as part 

of the program narrative:

17

o Statement of the Problem.

 Explain the importance of the problem or critical barrier to progress in the 

field that the proposed project addresses.

 Explain the criminal justice significance of the problem.

o Project Design and Implementation.

 Describe the overall strategy, methodology, and plan of activities to 

accomplish the specific aims of the project.

o Potential Impact.

 Explain the criminal justice significance of the proposed project.

 Explain how the application will strengthen the ME/C system and improve 

ME/C services.

o Capabilities and Competencies.

 Describe each senior/key personnels’ role in the project and why the 

individual is well-suited for that role.

o Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance 

Measures.

OJP will require each successful applicant to submit specific performance measures 

data as part of its reporting under the award (see “General Information about PostFederal Award Reporting Requirements” in Section F. Federal Award Administration 

Information). The performance measures correlate to the goals, objectives, and 

deliverables identified under "Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables" in Section A. 

Program Description.

NIJ does not require applicants to submit performance measures data with their 

application. Performance measures are included as an alert that NIJ will require 

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

this application, applicants should indicate an understanding of these requirements and 

discuss how they will gather the required data. The application should describe the 

 

17 For information on subawards (including the details on proposed subawards that should be included in the 

application), see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application and Submission Information.
NIJ-2017-11566

14

applicant's plan for collection of all of the performance measures data listed in the table 

below under “Data Recipient Provides,” should it receive funding.

Performance Measures for Purpose Area 1: NIJ Forensic Pathology Fellowships:

Objective Performance Measure(s) Description Data Recipient Provides

Increase the 

capacity of ME/C 

services through 

the addition of 

qualified 

pathologists.

Percent increase of services 

provided.

The number of 

ME/C fellowship 

participants who 

completed 

fellowship training.

The number of 

participants who 

completed fellowship 

training.

The number of overall 

fellowship participants.

The number of fellowship 

participants funded 

through NIJ’s 

Strengthening the 

Medical ExaminerCoroner System Program 

funding.

Percentage of death 

investigations 

performed by fellows 

through grant funds.

Number of deaths 

investigated six (6)

months prior to award 

start date.

Number of deaths 

investigated during the 

reporting period.

Total number of deaths 

investigated during the 

entire project.

Percentage of 

autopsies performed 

by fellows through 

grant funds.

Number of autopsies 

performed during the six

(6) month period prior to 

the award start date.

Number of autopsies 

performed during each 

reporting period.

Total number of 

autopsies performed 

during the entire project.

Percent decrease of 

backlogs.

Reduction in the 

average number of 

days from date of 

death to the delivery 

of an autopsy report.

Average number of days 

to produce a final autopsy 

report prior to award start 

date.

Average number of days 

to produce a final autopsy 
NIJ-2017-11566

15

Percent reduction in 

the number of 

backlogged death 

investigation cases.

report during each 

reporting period.

Average number of days 

to produce a autopsy

report at the end of the 

project period.

Quality of management as 

measured by such factors as 

whether significant project 

milestones were achieved, 

reporting and other deadlines 

were met, and costs 

remained within approved 

limits.

Relevance to the needs of 

the field as measured by 

whether the project’s 

substantive scope did not 

deviate from the funded 

proposal or any subsequent 

agency-approved 

modifications to the scope.

Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual and 

final progress reports of 

the work performed under 

the NIJ award, and, if 

applicable, an annual 

audit report.

In addition to the performance metrics, awardees will be required to provide to NIJ details about 

the impact and progress of the fellowship program in a narrative report. The agency should 

include any details about the number of fellowship applications prior to implementing the NIJ 

program and any changes noted in the number of fellowship applications received. Outreach 

efforts to increase the fellowship applicant pool as well as the results of these efforts should also 

be described.

Performance Measures for Purpose Area 2: Medical Examiner-Coroner Office 

Accreditation:

Objective Performance 

Measure(s) Description Data Recipient Provides

To strengthen 

the quality of 

medical 

examinercoroner 

services in the 

United States.

Increase in the number of 

accredited ME/C 

agencies.

Percentage of 

agencies/organizations that 

are accredited with 

Strengthening the Medical 

Examiner-Coroner System 

Program funding.

Percent increase in the 

number of certified 

individuals.

Percent of certified 

individuals.

Number of analysts.

Number of certified 

analysts.

Number of analysts 

seeking certification 

with Strengthening the 

Medical Examiner-
NIJ-2017-11566

16

Coroner System 

Program funding.

Quality of management 

as measured by such 

factors as whether 

significant project 

milestones were 

achieved, reporting and 

other deadlines were 

met, and costs remained 

within approved limits.

Relevance to the needs 

of the field as measured 

by whether the project’s 

substantive scope did not 

deviate from the funded 

proposal or any 

subsequent agencyapproved modifications to 

the scope.

Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual 

and final progress 

reports of the work

performed under the 

NIJ award, and, if 

applicable, an annual 

audit report.

Percentage of death 

investigations performed 

through grant funds.

Number of deaths 

investigated six (6)

months prior to award 

start date.

Number of deaths 

investigated during the 

reporting period.

Total number of deaths 

investigated during the 

entire project.

Percentage of autopsies 

performed through grant 

funds.

Number of autopsies 

performed during the

six (6) month period 

prior to the award start 

date.

Number of autopsies 

performed during each 

reporting period.

Total number of 

autopsies performed 

during the entire 

project.

Percent decrease of 

backlogs.

Reduction in the average 

number of days from date of 

death to the delivery of an

autopsy report.

Average number of 

days to produce a final 

autopsy report prior to 

award start date.
NIJ-2017-11566

17

Percent reduction in the 

number of backlogged death 

investigation cases.

Average number of 

days to produce a final 

autopsy report during 

each reporting period.

Average number of 

days to produce an

autopsy report at the 

end of the project 

period.

Quality of management 

as measured by such 

factors as whether 

significant project 

milestones were 

achieved, reporting and 

other deadlines were 

met, and costs remained 

within approved limits.

Relevance to the needs 

of the field as measured 

by whether the project’s 

substantive scope did not 

deviate from the funded 

proposal or any 

subsequent agencyapproved modifications to 

the scope.

Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual 

and final progress 

reports of the work 

performed under the 

NIJ award, and, if 

applicable, an annual 

audit report.

Number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” manner 

of death during the six 

(6) month period prior 

to the award start date.

Number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” manner 

of death performed 

during each reporting 

period.

Total number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” manner 

of death performed 

during the entire 

project.

Number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” cause 

of death during the six 
NIJ-2017-11566

18

(6) month period prior

to the award start date.

Number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” cause 

of death performed 

during each reporting 

period.

Total number of deaths 

certified as 

“undetermined” cause 

of death performed 

during the entire 

project.

In addition to the performance metrics, awardees under Purpose Area 2 will be required to 

provide to NIJ details about the impact and progress of the accreditation efforts in a narrative 

report. The report should include information on the level of effort provided towards 

accreditation processes and the progress made including the level of staffing and amount of 

time provided. Successes and pitfalls as well as any information NIJ can use towards the 

learning of ME/C accreditation processes, issues, and results should also be provided.

Note on Project Evaluations

An applicant that proposes to use award funds 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 protection regulations. 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.” Each applicant should provide sufficient information for OJP to 

determine whether the particular project it proposes would either intentionally or unintentionally 

collect and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ definition of research that 

appears at 28 C.F.R. Part 46 (“Protection of Human Subjects”). 

Research, for purposes of human subjects protection 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

for purposes of human subjects protection, applicants should consult the decision tree in the 

“Research and the protection of human subjects” section of the “Requirements related to 

Research” web page of the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements," available through the OJP Funding Resource Center. 

Every prospective applicant whose application may propose a research or statistical component 

also should review the “Data Privacy and Confidentiality Requirements” section on that web 

page.
NIJ-2017-11566

19

Appendices (not counted against the 15-page program narrative limit) include:

a. Bibliography/references.

b. Timelines and project plans with milestones.

c. Any tools/instruments, questionnaires, tables/charts/graphs, or maps pertaining to the 

proposed project that are supplemental to such items included in the main body of the 

narrative.

d. For Purpose Area 1: Forensic Pathology Fellowships: Forensic Pathology Fellowship 

Program Accreditation Documentation:

o Acceptable types of documentation of current accreditation include: an electronic 

(scanned) copy of the current accreditation certificate(s), a digital photograph of the 

current accreditation certificate(s), or a letter from the accrediting body that includes 

the certificate number. Additionally, if a certificate references another document that 

contains key information on the type or scope of the accreditation, provide a copy of 

that supplemental documentation. Independent accrediting or certifying organizations 

may include the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or other 

appropriate accrediting bodies.

e. For Purpose Area 2: Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation: Forensic 

Laboratory Accreditation Documentation:

o Acceptable types of documentation of current accreditation include: an electronic 

(scanned) copy of the current accreditation certificate(s), a digital photograph of the 

current accreditation certificate(s), or a letter from the accrediting body that includes 

the certificate number. Additionally, if a certificate references another document that 

contains key information on the type or scope of the accreditation, provide a copy of 

that supplemental documentation. Independent accrediting or certifying organizations

may include the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) and the 

International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners (IACME), or other 

appropriate accrediting bodies. If the office is not currently accredited, applicants 

may provide supporting documentation that demonstrate activities seeking 

achievement of accreditation.

f. Organizational chart of the applicant agency and all proposed collaborators involved in 

the project. Include project-related staffing plans and narratives for each organizational 

chart, proposed new hires, and any anticipated staffing changes related to the 

Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner System Program funding if received.

g. Curriculum vitae or resumes of the all key personnel. In addition, curriculum vitae, 

resumes, or biographical sketches of all known others who will be significantly involved 

in substantive aspects of the project.

h. List (to the extent known) of all proposed project staff members, including those affiliated 

with the applicant organization or any proposed subrecipients organization(s), any 

proposed consultant(s) and contractors (whether individuals or organizations), and any 

proposed members of an advisory board for the project (if applicable). The list should 
NIJ-2017-11566

20

include, for each individual and organization: name, title (if applicable), employer or other 

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

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

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

i. List of any previous and current NIJ awards to applicant organization, including the NIJassigned award numbers and a brief description of any products that resulted in whole 

or in part from work funded under the NIJ award(s).

j. Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and correctional agencies (if 

applicable).

k. List of other agencies, organizations, or funding sources to which this proposal has been 

submitted (if applicable).

4. Budget and Associated Documentation

a. Budget Detail Worksheet

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at 

www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. An applicant that 

submits its budget in a different format should use the budget categories listed in the 

sample budget worksheet. The Budget Detail Worksheet should break out costs by year.

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

see the DOJ Grants Financial Guide.

b. Budget Narrative

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

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

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

activities).

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

effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost 

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

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

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

used to reduce costs, without compromising quality.

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

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

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

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

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

Detail Worksheet, the budget narrative should describe costs by year.
NIJ-2017-11566

21

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

Contracts (if any)

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

may propose to enter into procurement "contracts" under the award. 

Whether — for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — a particular 

agreement between a recipient and a third party will be considered a "subaward" or 

instead considered a procurement "contract" under the award is determined by federal 

rules and applicable OJP guidance. It is an important distinction, in part because the 

federal administrative rules and requirements that apply to "subawards" and to 

procurement "contracts" under awards differ markedly.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements. 

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

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

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

purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — is a “subaward” or is instead a 

procurement “contract” under an award. 

Additional guidance on the circumstances under which (for purposes of federal grants 

administrative requirements) an agreement constitutes a subaward as opposed to a 

procurement contract under an award, is available (along with other resources) on the 

OJP Part 200 Uniform Requirements web page.

1. Information on proposed subawards

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

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

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

authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward.

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

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

application as approved by OJP. If, however, a particular subaward is not authorized by 

federal statute or regulation, and is not sufficiently described and justified in the 

application as approved by OJP, the recipient will be required, post-award, to request 

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

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

and program, the applicant should— (1) identify (if known) the proposed subrecipient(s), 
NIJ-2017-11566

22

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

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

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

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

the Budget Detail Worksheet and budget narrative.

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

proposed noncompetitive contracts over $150,000)

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

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

purposes of federal grants administrative requirements — is considered a procurement 

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

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

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

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

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

identified and described separately from procurement contracts.) 

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

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

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

the basis of full and open competition. If a proposed procurement contract would exceed 

the simplified acquisition threshold — currently, $150,000 — a recipient of an OJP award 

may not proceed without competition unless and until the recipient receives specific 

advance authorization from OJP to use a non-competitive approach for the procurement.

An applicant that (at the time of its application) intends — without competition — to enter 

into a procurement “contract” that would exceed $150,000 should include a detailed 

justification that explains to OJP why, in the particular circumstances, it is appropriate to 

proceed without competition. Various considerations that may be pertinent to the 

justification are outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide.

d. Pre-Agreement Costs

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

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if:

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

or

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

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

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

attach a copy of the indirect cost rate agreement to the application. An applicant that does

not have a current federally-approved rate may request one through its cognizant federal 
NIJ-2017-11566

23

agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant entity, or, if 

the applicant’s accounting system permits, applicants may propose to allocate costs in the 

direct cost categories.

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

please contact the OCFO Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at 

ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, applicants may obtain 

information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal at 

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

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

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

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

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

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

indirect or direct costs, but may not be double charged or inconsistently charged as both. 

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

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

cost rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.)

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

A tribe, tribal organization, or third party that proposes to provide direct services or 

assistance to residents on tribal lands should include in its application a resolution, letter, 

affidavit, or other documentation, as appropriate, that demonstrates (as a legal matter) that 

the applicant has the requisite authorization from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed 

project on tribal lands. In those instances when an organization or consortium of tribes 

applies for an award on behalf of a tribe or multiple specific tribes, the application should 

include appropriate legal documentation, as described above, from all tribes that would 

receive services or assistance under the award. A consortium of tribes for which existing 

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

an authorizing resolution or comparable legal documentation from each tribal governing 

body) may submit, instead, a copy of its consortium bylaws with the application.

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

applicant disclosure of high-risk status)

Every applicant (other than an individual applying in his/her personal capacity) is to 

download, complete, and submit the OJP Financial Management and System of Internal 

Controls Questionnaire, as part of its application.

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

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

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

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

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

federal awarding agency, the applicant must provide the following information:
NIJ-2017-11566

24

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

 The date the applicant was designated high-risk.

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

and email address).

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

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

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

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

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

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

document).

8. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

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

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

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). An applicant that does not expend any funds for 

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

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

9. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications

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

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

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

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

the budget submitted to OJP as part of the application under this solicitation. The 

applicant is to disclose applications made directly to federal awarding agencies, and also 

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

subaward (“subgrant”) federal funds).

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

Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement 

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

duplication.

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

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

months:

 The federal or State funding agency.

 The solicitation name/project name.
NIJ-2017-11566 

25

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

agency. 

SAMPLE

Federal or State 

Funding Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

Name/Phone/Email for Point of Contact at 

Federal or State Funding Agency

DOJ/Office of 

Community 

Oriented Policing 

Services (COPS)

COPS Hiring 

Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; 

jane.doe@usdoj.gov

Health and Human 

Services/Substance 

Abuse & Mental 

Health Services 

Administration

Drug-Free 

Communities 

Mentoring 

Program/North 

County Youth 

Mentoring 

Program

John Doe, 202/000-0000; john.doe@hhs.gov

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

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

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

statement. 

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

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

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

cooperative agreements (or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative 

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

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

submitted as part of in this application.”

b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity 

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

evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and 

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

applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

investigators, and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no 
NIJ-2017-11566

26

such conflicts of interest – whether personal or financial or organizational 

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

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

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

research. 

OR

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

the applicant has identified – including through review of pertinent information 

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

subrecipients – that could affect the independence or integrity of the 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, 

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

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

technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the 

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

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

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

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

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

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

research product is a problem and must be disclosed.

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

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

following two items:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, 

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

plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed.

OR

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

(personal, financial, or organizational) that could affect the independence and 
NIJ-2017-11566

27

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

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

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

expected to explain the specific processes and procedures that the applicant 

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

mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during 

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

may include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding 

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

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

OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on 

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

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

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

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

factors. 

c. Disclosure of Process Related to Executive Compensation

An applicant that is a nonprofit organization may be required to make certain 

disclosures relating to the processes it uses to determine the compensation of its 

officers, directors, trustees, and key employees.

Under certain circumstances, a nonprofit organization that provides unreasonably 

high compensation to certain persons may subject both the organization’s managers 

and those who receive the compensation to additional federal taxes. A rebuttable 

presumption of the reasonableness of a nonprofit organization’s compensation 

arrangements, however, may be available if the nonprofit organization satisfied 

certain rules set out in Internal Revenue Service regulations with regard to its 

compensation decisions.

Each applicant nonprofit organization must state at the time of its application (in the

"OJP Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire" 

mentioned earlier) whether or not the applicant entity believes (or asserts) that it 

currently satisfies the requirements of 26 C.F.R. 53.4958-6 (which relate to 

establishing or invoking a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness of compensation 

of certain individuals and entities). 

A nonprofit organization that states in the questionnaire that it believes (or asserts) 

that it has satisfied the requirements of 26 C.F.R. 53.4958-6 must then disclose, in an 

attachment to its application (to be titled "Disclosure of Process related to Executive 

Compensation"), the process used by the applicant nonprofit organization to 

determine the compensation of its officers, directors, trustees, and key employees 

(together, "covered persons").

At a minimum, the disclosure must describe in pertinent detail: (1) the composition of 

the body that reviews and approves compensation arrangements for covered 

persons; (2) the methods and practices used by the applicant nonprofit organization to 

ensure that no individual with a conflict of interest participates as a member of the 

body that reviews and approves a compensation arrangement for a covered person; 
NIJ-2017-11566

28

(3) the appropriate data as to comparability of compensation that is obtained in 

advance and relied upon by the body that reviews and approves compensation 

arrangements for covered persons; and (4) the written or electronic records that the 

applicant organization maintains as concurrent documentation of the decisions with 

respect to compensation of covered persons made by the body that reviews and 

approves such compensation arrangements, including records of deliberations and of 

the basis for decisions.

For purposes of the required disclosure, the following terms and phrases have the 

meanings set out by the Internal Revenue Service for use in connection with 26 

C.F.R. 53.4958-6: officers, directors, trustees, key employees, compensation, conflict 

of interest, appropriate data as to comparability, adequate documentation, and 

concurrent documentation.

Applicant nonprofit organizations should note that following receipt of an appropriate 

request, OJP may be authorized or required by law to make information submitted to 

satisfy this requirement available for public inspection. Also, a recipient may be required 

to make a prompt supplemental disclosure after the award in certain circumstances 

(e.g., changes in the way the organization determines compensation).

How to Apply

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

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

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

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

4726 or 606–545–5035, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on federal 

holidays. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

any problems that may have caused a rejection notification.

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

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

Grants.gov for updates will be automatically notified.

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

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

Support.

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

“optional.” OJP receives all files attached in both categories. Please ensure that all required 

documents are attached in either Grants.gov category.
NIJ-2017-11566

29

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

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

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

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

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

Characters Special Characters

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

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

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

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

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

Period (.) Applicants must use the “&” format in place of the ampersand (&)

when using XML format for documents.

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

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

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

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

the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps:

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

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

requirements. If an applicant entity has not fully complied with applicable SAM and unique 

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

applicant is not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for 

making the award to a different applicant.

An individual who wishes to apply in his/her personal capacity should search Grants.gov for 

funding opportunities for which individuals are eligible to apply. Use the Funding Opportunity 

Number (FON) to register. (An applicant applying as an individual must comply with all 

applicable Grants.gov individual registration requirements.)

Complete the registration form at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/IndCPRegister to create a 

username and password for Grants.gov. (An applicant applying as an individual should 

complete all steps except 1, 2, and 4.)

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

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

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

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

A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit identification number provided by the commercial 

company Dun and Bradstreet. This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and 

to validate address and point of contact information for applicants, recipients, and 

subrecipients. It will be used throughout the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS 

number is a free, one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a 
NIJ-2017-11566

30

DUNS number or apply online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 

1-2 business days.

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

repository for certain standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, 

recipients, and subrecipients. All applicants for OJP awards (other than individuals) must

maintain current registrations in the SAM database. An applicant must be registered in SAM 

to successfully register in Grants.gov. Each applicant must update or renew its SAM 

registration at least annually to maintain an active status. SAM registration and renewal 

can take as long as 10 business days to complete.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and other entities, go to https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/OrcRegister. Individuals registering 

with Grants.gov should go to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/individualregistration.html.

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

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

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

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

that an organization can have more than one AOR.

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

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

Federal Domestic Assistance ("CFDA") number for this solicitation is 16.560, titled “National 

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

opportunity number is NIJ-2017-11566.

6. Select the correct Competition ID. Some OJP solicitations posted to Grants.gov contain 

multiple purpose areas, denoted by the individual Competition ID. If applying to a solicitation 

with multiple Competition IDs, select the appropriate Competition ID for the intended 

purpose area of the application.

 Purpose Area 1: Forensic Pathology Fellowships — NIJ-2017-12060

 Purpose Area 2: Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation — NIJ-2017-12061

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

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

should receive two notifications from Grants.gov. The first will confirm the receipt of the 
NIJ-2017-11566

31

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11:59 p.m. eastern time on March 20, 2017.

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

timeframes.

Note: Application Versions

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

recent system-validated version submitted.

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

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

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

Support Hotline or the SAM Help Desk (Federal Service Desk) to report the technical issue and 

receive a tracking number. The applicant must email the NIJ contact identified in the Contact

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

approval to submit its application after the deadline. The applicant's email must describe the 

technical difficulties, and must include a timeline of the applicant’s submission efforts, the 

complete grant application, the applicant’s DUNS number, and any Grants.gov Help Desk or 

SAM tracking number(s). 

Note: OJP does not automatically approve requests to submit a late application. After 

OJP reviews the applicant's request, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to verify

the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late 

application has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application 

submission was due to the applicant's failure to follow all required procedures, OJP will deny the 

applicant’s request to submit its application. 

The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions:

 Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time (SAM registration and renewal 

can take as long as 10 business days to complete. The information transfer from SAM to 

Grants.gov can take up to 48 hours.)

 Failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its 

website.

 Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation.
NIJ-2017-11566

32

 Technical issues with the applicant’s computer or information technology environment, 

such as issues with firewalls or browser incompatibility.

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

the top of the OJP Funding Resource Center web page.

E. Application Review Information

Review Criteria

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

the following review criteria.

Within these sections, the narrative should address:

 Purpose, goals, and objectives.

 Review of relevant literature.

 Any planned products (e.g. guidelines, protocols, and operational documents).

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

 Management plan and organization.

 Any plans for disseminating information to broader audiences (if applicable to the 

proposed project).

Review Criteria for Purpose Area 1 – Forensic Pathology Fellowships

Statement of the Problem/Description of the Issue (Understanding of the problem and its 

importance) (15%)

1. Demonstrated understanding of the problem that exists in the ME/C system in the United 

States.

2. Demonstrated awareness of the current state of ME/C issues.

3. Impact of funding on the ME/C system and ME/C services in the United States.

Project Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit) (15%)

1. Awareness of the state of ME/C system and ME/C services in the United States.

2. Soundness of methods and approach to addressing the stated objectives of the 

proposed project. The overall strategy should be well reasoned and appropriate to 

accomplish the goals of the project.

3. Feasibility of proposed project.
NIJ-2017-11566

33

4. Awareness of pitfalls of the proposed project design and actions to minimize and/or 

mitigate them.

5. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate).

Expected Outcomes/Potential Impact (30%)

1. Description of the expected outcome(s) of the project. Anticipated forensic pathology 

fellowships to be completed and anticipated forensic pathology fellowship processes to 

be initiated and/or assisted through the program.

2. Potential for significantly improved understanding of the stated problem. If the goals of 

the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or MDI 

practice in the criminal justice system be improved?

3. What is the likelihood that the project will exert a sustained, powerful influence on the 

MDI field(s) as related to criminal justice?

4. Potential for innovative solution to address (all or a significant part of) the stated 

criminal/justice problem. How will successful completion change the concepts, methods, 

technologies, treatments, or services that drive MDI as it relates to criminal justice? How 

will a successful project address the identified ME/C problem and associated critical 

barriers to progress?

5. Potential to increase the awareness of best practices for the ME/C community.

Capabilities and Competencies (15%)

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (including all individuals and 

organizations identified in the application who will be significantly involved in substantive 

aspects of the proposal).

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

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

(including the applicant organization) and the scope of the proposed project.

4. Strength of the environment (e.g., institutional and jurisdictional support, equipment and 

other physical resources, or collaborative arrangements) in which the work will be done 

and its contribution to the probability of success. Does the program meet or exceed 

AGCME-accredited forensic pathology fellowship requirements?

5. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed approach.

Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures

(Relevance to policy and practice) (15%)

1. Demonstrated plan for collection of the performance measure data as described in the 

solicitation.
NIJ-2017-11566

34

Budget: Complete, Cost Effective, and Allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary 

for project activities). Budget narratives should demonstrate generally how applicants would

maximize cost effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives should demonstrate cost 

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

18 (10%)

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit (cost effectiveness).

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs.

4. Proposed budget alignment with proposed project activities.

Review Criteria for Purpose Area 2 – Medical Examiner-Coroner Office Accreditation

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

the following review criteria.

Statement of the Problem/Description of the Issue (Understanding of the problem and its 

importance) (15%)

1. Demonstrated understanding of the problem that exists in the ME/C system in the United 

States.

2. Demonstrated awareness of the current state of ME/C issues.

3. Impact of funding ME/C accreditation activities on the ME/C system and ME/C services 

in the United States.

Project Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit) (15%)

1. Awareness of the state of ME/C accreditation on the ME/C system and ME/C services in 

the United States.

2. Soundness of methods and approach to addressing the stated objectives of the 

proposed project. The overall strategy should be well reasoned and appropriate to 

accomplish the goals of the project. 

3. Feasibility of proposed project.

4. Awareness of pitfalls of the proposed project design and actions to minimize and/or 

mitigate them.

5. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate).

 

18 Generally speaking, a reasonable cost is a cost that, in its nature or amount, does not exceed that which would be 

incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the 

costs.
NIJ-2017-11566

35

Expected Outcomes/Potential Impact (30%)

1. Description of the expected outcome(s) of the project. Anticipated accreditation 

processes to be completed and anticipated accreditation processes to be initiated or 

assisted through the program.

2. Potential for significantly improved understanding of the stated problem. If the goals of 

the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or MDI

practice be improved?

3. What is the likelihood that the project will exert a sustained, powerful influence on the 

MDI field(s) as related to criminal justice?

4. Potential for innovative solution to address (all or a significant part of) the stated criminal 

justice problem. How will successful completion change the concepts, methods, 

technologies, treatments, or services that drive MDI as it relates to criminal justice? How 

will a successful project address the identified ME/C problem and associated critical 

barriers to progress?

5. Potential to increase the awareness of best practices for the ME/C community.

6. Potential to improve the understanding of scientific rationale underpinning existing ME/C 

practices.

7. Potential for innovative protocols to increase the efficiency, accuracy, reliability or costeffectiveness of medicolegal death investigations.

Capabilities and Competencies (15%)

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (including all individuals and 

organizations identified in the application who will be significantly involved in substantive 

aspects of the proposal).

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

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

(including the applicant organization) and the scope of the proposed project.

4. Strength of the environment (e.g., institutional and jurisdictional support, equipment and 

other physical resources, or collaborative arrangements) in which the work will be done 

and its contribution to the probability of success. 

5. Affordability and cost-effectiveness of proposed approach.

Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures

(Relevance to policy and practice) (15%)

1. Demonstrated plan for collection of the performance measure data as described in the 

solicitation.
NIJ-2017-11566

36

Budget: Complete, Cost Effective, and Allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary 

for project activities). Budget narratives should demonstrate generally how applicants would

maximize cost effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives should demonstrate cost 

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

19 (10%)

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit (cost effectiveness).

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs.

4. Proposed budget alignment with proposed project activities.

Review Process

OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for making awards. NIJ reviews the 

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

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

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

minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether an application meets basic 

minimum requirements and should proceed to further consideration, OJP screens applications 

for compliance with those requirements. Although specific requirements may vary, the following 

are common requirements applicable to all solicitations for funding under OJP programs:

 The application must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant.

 The application must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if 

applicable).

 The application must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation.

 The application must include all items designated as “critical elements.”

 The applicant must not be identified in SAM as excluded from receiving federal 

awards.

For a list of the critical elements for this solicitation, see “What an Application Should Include” 

under Section D. Application and Submission Information.

Peer review panels will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum 

requirements. NIJ may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, 

to assess applications on technical merit using the solicitation’s review criteria. An external peer 

reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given solicitation who is not a current DOJ 

employee. An internal reviewer is a current DOJ employee who is well-versed or has expertise 

in the subject matter of this solicitation. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting 

recommendations are advisory only, although reviewer views are considered carefully. Other 

 

19 Generally speaking, a reasonable cost is a cost that, in its nature or amount, does not exceed that which would be 

incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the 

costs.
NIJ-2017-11566

37

important considerations for OJP include underserved populations, geographic diversity, 

strategic priorities, and available funding, as well as the extent to which the budget detail 

worksheet and budget narrative accurately explain project costs that are reasonable, necessary, 

and otherwise allowable under federal law and applicable federal cost principles.

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

reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things to 

help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory 

record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the 

applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. If OJP anticipates that an 

award will exceed $150,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and consider any 

information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the integrity and 

performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee Performance and 

Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS").

Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any 

information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding

agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other 

information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by applicants.

The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a 

framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants for competitive awards. OJP takes into 

account information pertinent to matters such as —

1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity

2. Quality of the management systems of the applicant, and the applicant’s ability to meet 

prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial 

Guide

3. Applicant's history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including 

compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as awards from 

other federal agencies

4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the Part 200 

Uniform Requirements

5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively 

implement other award requirements. 

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

award decisions will be made by the Assistant Attorney General, who may take into account not 

only peer review ratings and NIJ recommendations, but also other factors as indicated in this 

section.
NIJ-2017-11566

38

F. Federal Award Administration Information

Federal Award Notices

Award notifications will be made by September 30, 2017. OJP sends award notifications by 

email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the 

authorizing official (E-Biz POC and AOR). The email notification includes detailed instructions 

on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award

acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on 

the award date. 

For each successful applicant, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant 

will be required to log in; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances;

designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award 

conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires physical 

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

Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements

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

applicable requirements of federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders (including 

applicable requirements referred to in the assurances and certifications executed in connection 

with award acceptance). OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information 

on post-award legal requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an 

application. 

Applicants should consult the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP 

Grants and Cooperative Agreements,” available in the OJP Funding Resource Center. In 

addition, applicants should examine the following two legal documents, as each successful 

applicant must execute both documents before it may receive any award funds.

 Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 

Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements.

 Standard Assurances.

Applicants may view these documents in the Apply section of the OJP Funding Resource 

Center.

The web pages accessible through the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable 

to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements” are intended to give applicants for OJP awards a 

general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that apply to many (or 

in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY 2017. Individual 

OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those additional conditions 

may relate to the particular statute or program, or solicitation under which the award is made; to 

the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under other federal 

awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other pertinent 

considerations.
NIJ-2017-11566

39

General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements

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

award under this solicitation will be required to submit the following reports and data.

Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual

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

accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Future 

awards and fund drawdowns may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, 

OJP may require additional reports.)

Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific

circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and 

administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP 

award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal 

government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the 

award condition posted on the OJP web site at http://ojp.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm.

Special reporting requirements may be required as appropriate.

Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, an award recipient also must 

provide data that measure the results of the work done under the award. To demonstrate 

program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ in fulfilling its responsibilities under the 

Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA 

Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, OJP will require any recipient, post award, to 

provide the data listed as “Data Recipient Provides” in the performance measures table in 

Section D. Application and Submission Information, under "Program Narrative," so that OJP can 

calculate values for this solicitation's performance measures.

G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s)

For questions directed to OJP, see NCJRS contact information on the title page.

For contact information for Grants.gov, see the title page.

H. Other Information

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

All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the 

federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold 

information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the 

responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one 

of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant 

to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application.

In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in 

those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory 

exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and 

names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate 
NIJ-2017-11566

40

circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicant/recipient that submitted a responsive 

document.

For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a 

nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that 

involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicant/recipient that submitted the 

application and ask it to identify — quite precisely — any particular information in the application 

that applicant/recipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it believes 

applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicant/recipient, OJP makes an 

independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a similar 

process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement 

sensitive information.

Provide Feedback to OJP

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

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

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

IMPORTANT: This email is for feedback and suggestions only. OJP does not reply from this 

mailbox to messages it receives in this mailbox. Any prospective applicant that has specific 

questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation must use the appropriate 

telephone number or email listed on the front of this document to obtain information. These 

contacts are provided to help ensure that prospective applicants can directly reach an individual 

who can address specific questions in a timely manner.

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

résumé to ojppeerreview@lmsolas.com. (Do not send your résumé to the OJP Solicitation 

Feedback email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization or entity 

can be a peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization/entity has submitted 

an application.
NIJ-2017-11566

41

Application Checklist

Strengthening the Medical Examiner-Coroner System Program

This application checklist has been created as an aid in developing an application.

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 29)

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 30)

To Register with Grants.gov: 

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 30)

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 30)

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the Funding Opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 30)

_____ Select the correct Competition ID (see page 30)

_____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 30)

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 28)

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

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

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

(see page 10)

After Application Submission, Receive Grants.gov Email Notifications That:

_____ (1) application has been received

_____ (2) application has either been successfully validated or rejected with errors

(see page 30)

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

_____ See NCJRS contact information on the title page

Overview of Post-Award Legal Requirements:

_____ Review the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and 

Cooperative Agreements" in the OJP Funding Resource Center.

Scope Requirement:

_____ The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s) of $100,000 per fellowship 

for Purpose 1.

Eligibility Requirement: Eligible applicants are States (including territories), units of local 

government, federally recognized Indian tribal governments (as determined by the Secretary of 

the Interior) that perform law enforcement functions, non-profit and for-profit organizations 

(including tribal non-profit and for-profit organizations), institutions of higher education (including 

tribal institutions of higher education), and certain qualified individuals.

What an Application Should Include:

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

_____ Project Abstract (see page 11)
NIJ-2017-11566

42

_____ Program Narrative (see page 12)

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 20)

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 20)

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 22)

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 23)

_____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (see page 23)

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 24)

_____ Additional Attachments

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 24)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 25)

_____ Disclosure of Process related to Executive Compensation (see page 27)

_____ CVs/Resumes (critical element) (see page 19)

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

(see page 9)