NOTICE 

Please note that a correction was made on page 1 of this solicitation. The e-mail contact 

for assistance with this solicitation has been changed from SEINIJ@doj.gov

to NIJSEI@ojp.usdoj.gov. 
NIJ-2014-3756 1

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

Approval Expires 07/31/2016

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

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

(NIJ) is seeking applications for research on sentinel events in the criminal justice system. This 

program furthers the Department’s mission by sponsoring research to provide objective, 

independent knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime and justice, particularly at the 

state and local levels.

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal Justice System Errors

Eligibility

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

with, states (including territories), units of local government (including federally recognized Indian 

tribal governments as determined by the Secretary of the Interior), nonprofit and for-profit 

organizations (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), institutions of higher education 

(including tribal institutions of higher education), and certain qualified individuals. For-profit 

organizations must agree to forgo any profit or management fee. Foreign governments, foreign 

organizations, and foreign institutions of higher education are not eligible to apply.

NIJ welcomes applications that involve two or more entities, however, one eligible entity must be the 

applicant and the other(s) must be proposed as subrecipient(s). The applicant must be the entity 

with primary responsibility for conducting and leading the research.

NIJ may elect to make awards for applications submitted under this solicitation in future fiscal years, 

dependent on the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations.

Deadline

Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. (See “How to Apply,”

page 21.) All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 22, 2014. (See “Deadlines: 

Registration and Application,” page 3.)

All applicants are encouraged to read this Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov.

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 e-mail to support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov

Support Hotline hours of operation are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except federal holidays. 

Applicants that experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond their control that prevent 

them from submitting their application by the deadline must e-mail the NIJ contact identified below 

within 24 hours after the application deadline and request approval to submit their application.

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact NIJSEI@ojp.usdoj.gov.

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 announcement: NIJ-2014-3756

Release date: February 21, 2014

SL001095
NIJ-2014-3756 2

Contents

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

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

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

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

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

What an Application Should Include....................................................................................... 9

Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424).......................... 9

Project Abstract.................................................................................................................10

Program Narrative.............................................................................................................10

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

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

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

Additional Attachments......................................................................................................15

Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable) ........................17

Selection Criteria...................................................................................................................17

Review Process ....................................................................................................................19

Additional Requirements .......................................................................................................19

How to Apply.........................................................................................................................21

Provide Feedback to OJP .....................................................................................................24

Application Checklist .............................................................................................................25
NIJ-2014-3756 3

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal 

Justice System Errors

(CFDA No. 16.560)

Overview

The purpose of the National Institute of Justice grants program is to encourage and support 

research, development, and evaluation to improve criminal justice policy and practice in the 

United States. NIJ is interested in stimulating research in a new area of study in criminal justice 

research – an exploration of the use of sentinel event reviews to improve the justice system 

overall. Mistakes, or negative outcomes, in the criminal justice system rarely are caused by one 

single act or actor. Often, mistakes signal multiple weaknesses in the criminal justice system or 

process. Thus, corrections to such errors need to go beyond traditional remedies that focus on 

removing the “bad apple” responsible for the event to those that address the underlying systemlevel problems that contributed to the event. Sentinel event review processes have been used in 

other fields, notably aviation and medicine, and NIJ would like to explore whether similar 

reviews would be feasible in the criminal justice field.

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

(sections 201 and 202).

Deadlines: Registration and Application

Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. OJP encourages

applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline. In addition, 

OJP urges applicants to submit applications 72 hours prior to the application due date. The 

deadline to apply for funding under this announcement is 11:59 eastern time on May 22, 2014.

See “How to Apply” on page 21 for details.

Eligibility

Refer to the title page for eligibility under this program.

Program-Specific Information

When bad things happen in a complex system, the cause is rarely a single act, event, or slip-up. 

More often, bad outcomes like wrongful convictions, mistaken prison releases, and even 

revictimization are "sentinel events" – defined as significant negative outcomes that signal 

underlying weaknesses in the system or process. Sentinel events likely are the result of 

compound errors and, if properly analyzed and addressed, may provide important keys to 

strengthening the system and preventing future adverse events or outcomes. Even “near 

misses,” in which tragic outcomes are eventually averted, can signal serious underlying 

weaknesses in the overall system. 

As NIJ Visiting Fellow James Doyle has noted, the conviction of the wrong person is never the 

exclusive responsibility of a lone "bad apple"; it is always an "organizational accident." No 

individual mistake is enough to create independently an organizational accident; small errors 
NIJ-2014-3756 4

have to combine with each other — and with latent system weaknesses — before the tragedy 

can be completed. The correct answer to the question, "Who is responsible for this wrongful 

conviction?" is almost invariably: "Everyone involved, to one degree or another," if not by 

making a mistake, then by failing to catch one. And "everyone involved" may include not only 

law enforcement, forensic scientists, and lawyers who are close to the event, but also 

legislators, policy makers, funders, and appellate judges far from the scene of the event who 

dictated the conditions under which the sharp-end operators work. 

The notion of sentinel events borrows extensively from medicine and aviation (and other 

industries) wherein a blame-placing, backward-looking review process bows to a more forwardthinking, non-blaming, problem-solving approach. As in these other fields, significant advances 

in criminal justice processes may be achieved through the combined efforts of researchers, 

system analysts, and the broad span of practitioners whose work is inextricably linked to the 

occurrence of error — and the eventual strengthening of the system and the prevention of future 

system errors.

For this solicitation, NIJ invites research applications that add to our understanding of how the 

concept of sentinel events can be used to improve the functioning of the criminal justice system. 

Funding under this solicitation will support multiple awards for either basic research or for 

applied studies (including evaluations). Though NIJ acknowledges that some projects involving 

field research may be more costly, NIJ anticipates that many relevant basic research projects 

could be supported at more modest funding levels.

This is an open solicitation and all high-quality research proposals regarding some aspect of 

sentinel events pertaining to the criminal justice system will be considered under this funding 

opportunity. Researchers are encouraged to consider the following sentinel events research 

ideas or to propose their own research questions and designs:

• Learning from other industries: What lessons can be learned from other industries, such as 

aviation or medicine, that could guide implementation of an all-stakeholders, non-blaming, 

forward-looking approach in a criminal justice settings? How well (or poorly) can 

experiences in other industries be expected to map in a criminal justice environment?

• Dealing with liability: What can we know about the risks of disclosure and liability that could 

result from a review of a sentinel event? What processes, safeguards, or protections have 

proven beneficial in managing disclosures of sensitive information for purposes of a nonblaming review process?

• Organizational change: What broader research work on organizational change will help 

inform the criminal justice system as it seeks to make system changes as a result of sentinel 

event reviews?

• Overcoming reviewer bias: What theories of social psychology, system change, and/or 

organizational psychology should guide the development of sentinel event review strategies 

among criminal justice actors? What techniques could be tested for overcoming commonly 

used heuristic approaches or deeply held biases that might prevent an otherwise successful 

examination of sentinel events?

• “Near-miss” events: What distinctive advantages – and challenges – would attend a review 

based on a “near miss” sentinel event (i.e., one in which the bad outcome nearly occurs but 
NIJ-2014-3756 5

is averted)? What would we expect to be the potential for system change from such reviews 

in which, despite errors along the way, the prevailing perception is “no harm, no foul: the 

system got it right?”

• Small-scale reviews: What lessons can be gleaned from criminal justice reviews that 

anticipate the sentinel events approach yet restrict the review of sentinel events to a single 

sector of the criminal justice system (e.g., only within the police department)? How can 

these more focused reviews be leveraged to undertake broader, more inclusive sentinel 

events reviews that incorporate a wider group of stakeholder-participants?

• Constructing a Sentinel Event (SE) report: Based on experiences in aviation and medicine, 

what are the essential parameters to a report from an all-stakeholders sentinel event 

review? How is timeliness balanced with a need for detail? How is authorship and review 

managed? Should some (or all) participants in a SE review process have “veto” authority 

over the final report? Can an effective SE report focus only on findings and refrain from 

stating explicit recommendations? What reporting strategies provide the greatest opportunity 

to influence policy? What follow-up mechanisms are necessary to ensure appropriate 

responses to findings and recommendations? How is explicit wrong-doing managed in a SE 

report? How well do the SE analysis and reporting strategies from medicine, aviation, and 

other industries transfer to a criminal justice context?

• The role of physical evidence in a SE review: How significant is physical evidence in 

reviewing sentinel events in aviation, hospital management, or other industries? What role 

will physical evidence play in ensuring a successful review of a criminal justice sentinel 

event? What obstacles must be overcome to safeguard against an overreliance on physical 

evidence?

These research questions are suggestive only. Applicants are encouraged to develop 

compelling, research questions and rigorous research strategies that will provide the best 

investment opportunities for advancing our understanding of how to develop, guide, and 

complete an ambitious, all-stakeholders, non-blaming, forward-looking sentinel events approach 

in criminal justice.

Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected Scholarly Products

The goals of the Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal Justice System Errors solicitation 

are to engage in a new area of research in the criminal justice field and improve the knowledge 

and understanding of criminal justice related issues through science. NIJ strives to provide 

objective and independent knowledge and validated tools to reduce violence on both a State 

and local level, and promote justice for victims of all types of crimes. The objectives of this 

solicitation are to fund high quality research projects in the field of criminal justice.

In addition to required data sets, a draft and final summary overview of research results, interim 

and final progress and financial reports,

1 NIJ expects scholarly products to result from each 

award under this solicitation, taking the form of one or more published, peer-reviewed, scientific 

journal articles, and/or (if appropriate) law review journal articles, book chapter(s) or book(s) in 

the academic press, technological prototypes, patented inventions, or similar scientific products. 

 1 See “Additional Requirements” section of this solicitation, below, for additional information.
NIJ-2014-3756 6

Amount and Length of Awards

NIJ anticipates that up to a total of $800,000 may become available for awards under this 

solicitation. From the total amount, NIJ anticipates that it will make one to multiple awards for a 

a 36-month project period.

To allow time for, among other things, any necessary post-award review, modification, and 

clearance by OJP of the proposed budget, applicants should propose an award start date of 

January 1, 2015. 

If the applicant is proposing a project that reasonably could be conducted in discrete phases, 

with each phase resulting in completion of one or more significant, defined milestones, then NIJ 

strongly recommends that the applicant structure the application – specifically including the 

narrative, expected scholarly products, timelines/milestones, and budget detail worksheet and 

budget narrative – to clearly set out each phase. (This is particularly the case if the applicant 

proposes a project that will exceed – in cost or length of project period – the amount or length 

anticipated for an individual award (or awards) under this solicitation.) Given limitations on the 

availability to NIJ of funds for research, development, and evaluation awards, this information 

will assist NIJ in considering whether partial funding of proposals that would not receive full 

funding would be productive. (If NIJ elects to fund only certain phases of a proposed project in 

FY 2014, the expected scholarly products from the partial-funding award may, in some cases,

vary from those described above.)

NIJ may, in certain cases, provide supplemental funding in future years to awards under its 

research, development, and evaluation solicitations. Important considerations in decisions 

regarding supplemental funding include, among other factors, the availability of funding, 

strategic priorities, NIJ’s assessment of the quality of the management of the award (for 

example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and NIJ’s assessment of the progress of 

the work funded under the award. 

Applicants should be aware that the total period of an award, including one that receives a 

funding supplement or a no-cost extension, ordinarily will not exceed three years. 

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

or additional requirements that may be imposed by law.
NIJ-2014-3756 7

Type of Award

NIJ anticipates that any award under this solicitation will be made in the form of a grant. (Any 

funds provided to another federal agency will be handled in a different manner.)

Evaluation Research

If an application includes an evaluation research component (or consists entirely of evaluation 

research), the application is expected to propose the use of random selection and assignment 

of participants to experimental and control conditions, if feasible. Applications that include 

evaluation research but do not propose the use of randomization should explain clearly why 

randomization is not feasible, and should propose a strong quasi-experimental design that can 

address the risk of selection bias.

Also, applications that include evaluation research are expected to consider seriously 

incorporation of cost/benefit analysis. NIJ views cost/benefit analysis as an effective way to 

communicate and disseminate findings from evaluation research and best serve our criminal 

justice constituents.

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

Department of Justice regulations on confidentiality and human subjects’ protection. See “Other 

Requirements for OJP Applications” at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm.

Budget Information

What will not be funded:

• Proposals primarily to purchase equipment, materials, or supplies. (A budget may 

include these items if they are necessary to conduct research, development, 

demonstration, evaluation, or analysis.)

• Proposals that are not responsive to this specific solicitation.

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver

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

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

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

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

agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.2 The 2014 salary 

table for SES employees is available at www.opm.gov/salary-tables. 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. (Any such additional compensation will not be 

considered matching funds where match requirements apply.)

The Director of NIJ may exercise discretion to waive, on an individual basis, the limitation on 

compensation rates allowable under an award. An applicant requesting a waiver should include 

a detailed justification in the budget narrative of the application. Unless the applicant submits a 

 2 This limitation on use of award funds does not apply to the non-profit organizations specifically named at Appendix 

C to 2 C.F.R. Part 230.
NIJ-2014-3756 8

waiver request and justification with the application, the applicant should anticipate that OJP will 

request the applicant to adjust and resubmit the budget.

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

uniqueness of the service the individual will provide, the individual’s specific knowledge of the 

program or project being undertaken with award funds, and a statement explaining that the 

individual’s salary is commensurate with the regular and customary rate for an individual with 

his/her qualifications and expertise, and for the work to be done.

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

OJP strongly encourages applicants that propose to use award funds for any conference-, 

meeting-, or training-related activity to review carefully – before submitting an application – the 

OJP policy and guidance on “conference” approval, planning, and reporting available 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/confcost.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 such costs for cooperative agreement recipients and of some such 

costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, including 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 of the OJP "Other 

Requirements for OJP Applications" Web page 

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

Match Information

See “Cofunding” paragraph under “What an Application Should Include” (below).

Performance Measures

To assist the Department with fulfilling its responsibilities under the Government Performance 

and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, 

Public Law 111–352, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation must provide data 

that measure the results of their work done under this solicitation. OJP will require any award 

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

that OJP can calculate values for the “Performance Measures” column. (Submission of 

performance measures data is not required for the application.) Performance measures for this 

solicitation are as follows:
NIJ-2014-3756 9

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides

Conduct research on 

some aspect of sentinel 

events having clear 

implications for criminal 

justice policy and 

practice in the United 

States. 

1. Relevance to the needs of the field as 

measured by whether the project’s substantive 

scope did not deviate from the funded proposal or 

any subsequent agency-approved modifications 

to the scope.

2. Quality of the research as demonstrated by the 

scholarly products that result in whole or in part 

from work funded under the NIJ award 

(published, peer-reviewed, scientific journal 

articles, and/or (as appropriate for the funded 

project) law review journal articles, book 

chapter(s) or book(s) in the academic press, 

technological prototypes, patented inventions, or 

similar scientific products).

3. Quality of management as measured by such 

factors as whether significant project milestones 

were achieved, reporting and other deadlines 

were met, and costs remained within approved 

limits.

1. Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual and 

final progress reports, 

and a draft and final 

summary overview of the 

work performed under 

the NIJ award.

2. List of citation(s) to all 

scholarly products that 

resulted in whole or in 

part from work funded 

under the NIJ award.

3. If applicable, each data 

set that resulted in whole 

or in part from work 

funded under the NIJ 

award.

What an Application Should Include

Applicants should anticipate that if they fail to submit an application that contains all of the 

specified elements, it may affect negatively the review of their application; and, should a 

decision be made to make an award, it may result in the inclusion of special conditions that 

preclude the recipient from accessing or using award funds pending satisfaction of the 

conditions.

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications determined to be nonresponsive to the 

scope of the solicitation, or that do not include the application elements that NIJ has designated 

to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration. Under 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. 

For purposes of this solicitation, “key personnel” means the principal investigator and any and 

all co-principal investigators. 

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

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

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

applicants include resumes in a single file.

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 
NIJ-2014-3756 10

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).

2. Project Abstract

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

to the proposed project. NIJ uses the project abstract for a number of purposes, including 

assignment of the application to an appropriate review panel. If the application is funded, the 

project abstract typically will become public information and be used to describe the project. 

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

project in 250-400 words. Project abstracts should be—

• Written for a general public audience.

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

• Single-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman) with 1-inch margins.

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

program narrative. 

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

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

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

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

opportunity to share information with the public regarding promising but unfunded 

applications, for example, through a listing on a webpage available to the public. The intent 

of this public posting would be to allow other possible funders to become aware of such 

proposals. 

In the project abstract template, applicants are asked to indicate whether they give OJP 

permission to share their project abstract (including contact information) with the public if NIJ 

does not fund the proposed project. Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not 

affect OJP’s funding decisions, and, if the application is not funded, granting permission will 

not guarantee that project abstract information will be shared, nor will it guarantee funding 

from any other source.

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

listing of promising but 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 30 double-spaced pages 

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

tables, charts, figures, and other illustrations count toward the 30-page limit for the narrative 

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

count toward the 30-page limit.
NIJ-2014-3756 11

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

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

The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative.3

Program Narrative Guidelines: 

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

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

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

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

organization and the principal investigator.

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

narrative limit).

If an applicant is resubmitting a proposal presented previously to NIJ, but not 

funded, the applicant should indicate this. A statement should be provided, no 

more than two pages, addressing: (1) the title, submission date, and NIJassigned application number of the previous proposal, and (2) a brief summary of 

revisions to the proposal, including responses to previous feedback received 

from NIJ.

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

limit).

d. Main Body.

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

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

narrative:

• Statement of the Problem.

• Project Design and Implementation.

• Potential Impact.

• Capabilities/Competencies.

Within these sections, the narrative should address:

• Purpose, goals, and objectives.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Information,” above.
NIJ-2014-3756 12

• Review of relevant literature.

• Detailed description of research design and methods, such as research 

questions, hypotheses, description of sample, and analysis plan.

• Planned Scholarly Products (See “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and 

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

above, for a discussion of expected scholarly products.) 

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

• Management plan and organization.

• Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the 

proposed project). Applicants should identify plans (if any) to produce or 

to make available to broader interested audiences – such as criminal 

justice practitioners or policymakers – summary information from the 

planned scholarly products of the proposed project (such as summaries 

of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals), in a form designed to be 

readily accessible and useful to those audiences. (Such dissemination 

might include, for example, trade press articles and webinars.)

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

• Bibliography/references.

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

pertaining to the proposed project that are supplemental to such items 

included in the main body of the narrative.

• Curriculum vitae or resumes of the principal investigator and any and all coprincipal investigators. In addition, curriculum vitae, resumes, or biographical 

sketches of all other individuals (regardless of “investigator” status) who will 

be significantly involved in substantive aspects of the proposal (including, for 

example, individuals such as statisticians serving as consultants to conduct

proposed data analysis).

• List (to the extent known) of all proposed project staff members, including 

those affiliated with the applicant organization or any proposed subrecipient 

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 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.

• Proposed project timeline and expected milestones.
NIJ-2014-3756 13

• Human Subjects Protection paperwork (documentation and forms related to 

Institutional Review Board (IRB) review). 

(See www.nij.gov/funding/humansubjects/Pages/welcome.aspx). NOTE: 

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

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go 

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

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

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

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

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

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

above, for definition of “scholarly products.”)

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement and 

correctional agencies (if applicable).

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

proposal has been submitted (if applicable).

• Data archiving plan. Applicants should anticipate that NIJ will require (through 

special award conditions, including a partial withholding of award funds) that 

data sets resulting in whole or in part from projects funded under this 

solicitation be submitted for archiving with the National Archive of Criminal 

Justice Data (NACJD). (For a detailed discussion of the information NIJ 

expects to find in a data archiving plan, see www.nij.gov/funding/dataresources-program/applying/Pages/data-archiving-strategies.aspx.)

Applications should include as an appendix a brief plan – labeled “Data 

Archiving Plan” – to comply with data archiving requirements. The plan 

should provide brief details about proposed data management and archiving,

including submission to NIJ (through NACJD) of all files and documentation

necessary to allow for future efforts by others to reproduce the project’s 

findings and/or to extend the scientific value of the data set through 

secondary analysis. Pertinent files and documentation includes, among other 

things, qualitative and quantitative data produced, instrumentation and data 

collection forms, codebook(s), any specialized programming code necessary 

to reproduce all constructed measures and the original data analysis,

description of necessary de-identification procedures, and (when required) a 

copy of the privacy certificate and informed consent protocols. 

The plan should be one or two pages in length and include the level of effort 

associated with meeting archiving requirements.

Note that required data sets are to be submitted 90 days before the end of 

the project period. 
NIJ-2014-3756 14

4. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found 

at www.ojp.gov/funding/forms/budget_detail.pdf. Applicants that submit their budget in a 

different format should include the budget categories listed in the sample budget 

worksheet. (Work associated with satisfying data archiving requirements should be 

reflected.) Please note: NIJ expects applicants to provide a thorough narrative to each 

section of the Budget Detail Worksheet, as described under “Budget Narrative,” below.

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

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

b. Budget Narrative

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

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

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

activities).

Applicants should demonstrate in their budget narratives how they will maximize cost 

effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives generally should 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 narrative should be sound mathematically and correspond 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 they are relevant to the completion 

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

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

Narrative should be broken down by year.

c. Cofunding

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

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

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

The application should identify generally any such contributions that the applicant 

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

will be supported with non-federal contributions.

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.
NIJ-2014-3756 15

d. Non-Competitive Procurement Contracts In Excess of Simplified Acquisition 

Threshold

If an applicant proposes to make one or more non-competitive procurements of products 

or services, where the non-competitive procurement will exceed the simplified 

acquisition threshold (also known as the small purchase threshold), which is currently 

set at $150,000, the application should address the considerations outlined in the OJP 

Financial Guide.

5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

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

(This requirement does not apply to units of local government.) Attach a copy of the 

federally approved indirect cost rate agreement to the application. Applicants that do not 

have an approved rate may request one through their cognizant federal agency, which will

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

applicant’s accounting system permits, costs may be allocated in the direct cost categories.

For assistance with identifying your cognizant agency, please contact the OJP Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or 

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

information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal 

at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/pdfs/indirect_costs.pdf.

6. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable)

Tribes, tribal organizations, or third parties proposing to provide direct services or assistance 

to residents on tribal lands should include in their applications a resolution, a letter, affidavit, 

or other documentation, as appropriate, that certifies that the applicant has the legal 

authority from the tribe(s) to implement the proposed project on tribal lands. In those 

instances when an organization or consortium of tribes applies for a grant on behalf of a 

tribe or multiple specific tribes, the application should include appropriate legal 

documentation, as described above, from all tribes that would participate in the research. 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. Additional Attachments

a. Applicant disclosure of pending applications4

Applicants are to disclose whether they have pending applications for federally funded 

grants or subgrants (including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding 

to support the same project being proposed under this solicitation and will cover the 

identical cost items outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the application 

under this solicitation. The disclosure should include both direct applications for federal 

funding (e.g., applications to federal agencies) and indirect applications for such funding 

(e.g., applications to state agencies that will subaward federal funds).

 4 Typically, the applicant is not the principal investigator; rather, the applicant, most frequently, is the institution, 

organization, or company in which the principal investigator is employed.
NIJ-2014-3756 16

SAMPLE

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.

Applicants that have pending applications as described above are to provide the 

following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 months:

• The Federal or State funding agency.

• The solicitation name/project name.

• The point of contact information at the applicable funding agency.

Applicants should include the table as a separate attachment, with the file name 

“Disclosure of Pending Applications,” to their application. Applicants that do not have 

pending applications as described above are to include a statement to this effect in the 

separate attachment page (e.g., “[Applicant Name on SF-424] does not have pending 

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

(including cooperative agreements) that include requests for funding to support the same 

project being proposed under this solicitation and will cover the identical cost items 

outlined in the budget narrative and worksheet in the application under this solicitation.”).

b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity

If a proposal involves research and/or evaluation, regardless of the proposal’s other

merits, in order to receive funds, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation

independence, including appropriate safeguards to ensure research/evaluation

objectivity and integrity.

For purposes of this solicitation, research and evaluation independence and integrity 

pertains to ensuring that the design, conduct, or reporting of research and evaluation

funded by NIJ grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts will not be biased by any 

personal or financial conflict of interest on the part of the investigators responsible for the 

research and evaluation or on the part of the applicant organization. Conflicts can be 

Federal or 

State 

Funding 

Agency 

Solicitation 

Name/Project 

Name

Name/Phone/E-mail for Point of Contact at 

Funding Agency

DOJ/COPS COPS Hiring 

Program

Jane Doe, 202/000-0000; jane.doe@usdoj.gov

HHS/ 

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
NIJ-2014-3756 17

either actual or apparent. Examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict 

situations may include 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 colleague (potential apparent conflict). With regard to 

potential organizational conflicts of interest, as one example, generally an organization 

could not be given a grant to evaluate a project if that organization had itself 

provided substantial prior technical assistance to that project, as the organization in such 

an instance would 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 is a problem.

In the attachment dealing with research and evaluation independence and integrity, the 

applicant should explain the process and procedures that the applicant has put in place 

to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) potential personal or financial 

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

should identify any potential organizational conflicts of interest on the part of the 

applicant with regard to the proposed research/evaluation. If the applicant reasonably 

believes that no potential personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist, then the 

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

conclusion. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard could include 

organizational codes of ethics/conduct or policies regarding organizational, personal, 

and financial conflicts of interest.

For situations in which potential personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist, in 

the attachment, the applicant should identify the safeguards the applicant has or will put 

in place to eliminate, mitigate, or otherwise address those conflicts of interest.

Considerations in assessing research and evaluation independence and integrity will 

include, but may not be limited to, the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify 

factors that could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the 

organization in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation activity; and the 

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

8. Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable)

Any applicant (other than an individual) that is a non-governmental entity and that has not 

received any award from OJP within the past 3 years is to download, complete, and submit

this form.

Selection Criteria

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

the following review criteria.

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

1. Demonstrated understanding of the problem.
NIJ-2014-3756 18

2. Demonstrated awareness of the state of current research. 

Project Design and Implementation (Quality and technical merit) – 50%

1. Soundness of methods and analytic and technical approach to addressing the stated 

aim(s) of the proposed project.

2. Feasibility of proposed project.

3. Awareness of potential pitfalls of proposed project design and feasibility of proposed 

actions to minimize and/or mitigate them.

Potential Impact – 20% 

Potential for a significant scientific or technical advance(s) that will improve criminal justice in 

the United States, such as—

• Potential for significantly improved understanding of the stated criminal justice problem.

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

justice problem.

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

applicant organization and proposed project staff) – 20%

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed project staff (that is, the principal investigator, 

any and all co-principal investigators, and all other individuals (and organizations)

identified in the application (regardless of “investigator” status) who will be involved 

significantly 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.

Budget

Peer reviewers will consider and may comment on the following additional items in the context 

of scientific and technical merit.

1. Total cost of the project relative to the perceived benefit (cost effectiveness).

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

3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs.

4. Proposed budget alignment with proposed project activities.
NIJ-2014-3756 19

Plan for Dissemination to Broader Audiences (if applicable to the proposed project)

Peer reviewers may comment – in the context of scientific and technical merit – on the proposed 

plan (if any) to produce or to make available to broader interested audiences, such as criminal 

justice practitioners or policymakers, summary information from the planned scholarly products 

of the project.

As discussed further under “Review Process,” below, award decisions will be made by the 

Director of NIJ, who may consider factors including, but not limited to, planned scholarly 

products, proposed budgets, past performance (including scholarly products) under prior NIJ 

and OJP awards.

Review Process

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

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

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

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

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

combination, to review the applications. 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. A peer review panel will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic 

minimum requirements. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are 

advisory only, although their views are considered carefully. In addition to peer review ratings, 

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

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

available funding.

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer, in consultation with NIJ, reviews applications for 

potential discretionary awards to evaluate the fiscal integrity and financial capability of 

applicants, examines proposed costs to determine if the Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget 

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

necessary, and allowable under applicable federal cost principles and agency regulations. 

All final award decisions will be made by the Director of NIJ, who may consider factors 

including, but not limited to, underserved populations, geographic diversity, strategic priorities, 

past performance, and available funding.

Additional Requirements

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

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

these additional requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional information for each 

requirement can be found at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/funding/other_requirements.htm. 

• Civil Rights Compliance
NIJ-2014-3756 20

• Civil Rights Compliance Specific to State Administering Agencies

• Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations

• Confidentiality

• Research and the Protection of Human Subjects

• Anti-Lobbying Act

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements

• Reporting of Potential Fraud, Waste, and Abuse, and Similar Misconduct

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

• DOJ Information Technology Standards (if applicable) 

• Single Point of Contact Review

• Non-Supplanting of State or Local Funds

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide

• Suspension or Termination of Funding

• Non-profit Organizations

• For-profit Organizations

• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)

• Rights in Intellectual Property 

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

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

• Active SAM Registration 

• Policy and Guidance for Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conferences (including 

Meetings and Trainings)

• OJP Training Guiding Principles for Grantees and Subgrantees

As indicated earlier in this solicitation, NIJ expects scholarly products to result from any award 

under this solicitation. Please review the “Goals, Objectives, Deliverables, and Expected 
NIJ-2014-3756 21

Scholarly Products” segment of the “Program-Specific Information” section of this solicitation, as 

well as the “Performance Measures” section.

In addition to the expectation of scholarly products, successful applicants under this solicitation 

will be required to submit the following deliverables regarding the work funded by the NIJ award:

Semi-Annual and Final Progress Reports

Applicants should anticipate that progress reports will be required to follow the non-budgetary 

components of the Research Performance Progress Report (RPPR) template/format. More 

information on post-award reporting requirements and RPPRs may be found 

at www.nij.gov/funding/Pages/welcome.aspx. Future award and fund draw-downs may be 

withheld if reports are delinquent.

Quarterly and Final Financial Reports; Audit Reports

Quarterly and final financial status reports are required. If applicable, an annual audit report in 

accordance with Office of Management and Budget requirements must be submitted. Future 

award and fund draw-downs may be withheld if reports are delinquent.

Draft and Final Summary Overview of the Work Conducted under the Award

The overview is expected to provide an overall summary of the work under, and results of, the 

project funded by NIJ under this solicitation. Among other things, the summary overview should 

address the purpose of the project, project subjects (if applicable), project design and methods, 

data analysis, project findings, and implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the 

United States.

A draft summary overview no longer than 10 pages long (double-spaced) is to be submitted 90 

days prior to the end of the project period for NIJ review and comment.

Required Data Sets and Associated Files and Documentation

As discussed earlier, applicants should anticipate that NIJ will require any recipient of an award 

under this solicitation to submit to NACJD all data sets that result in whole or in part from the 

work funded by NIJ, along with associated files and any documentation necessary to allow for 

future efforts by others to reproduce the project’s findings and/or to extend the scientific value of 

the data set through secondary analysis. All data sets and necessary documentation are to be 

submitted 90 days prior to the end of the project period. For more information, see the “Program 

Narrative” section of “What an Application Must Include,” above. 

How to Apply

Applicants must register in, and submit applications through Grants.gov, a “one-stop storefront” 

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, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except 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 and a user password. OJP 
NIJ-2014-3756 22

encourages applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline. 

In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications 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.

NIJ 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 notified.

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

characters in names of attachment files. Valid file names may include only the characters 

shown in the table below. Grants.gov is designed to reject any application that includes 

an attachment(s) with a file name that contains any characters not shown in the table 

below. Grants.gov is designed to forward successfully submitted applications to OJP’s 

Grants Management System (GMS).

Characters Special Characters

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

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

Number 0 – 9 Comma ( , ) Semicolon ( ; ) Apostrophe ( ‘ )

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

Hyphen ( - ) Percent sign (%) Plus sign (+) Equal sign (=)

Space When using the ampersand (&) in XML, applicants must use the “&” 

Period (.) format.

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

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

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

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

the application is rejected.

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 

1. Acquire a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. In general, the Office of 

Management and Budget requires that all applicants (other than individuals) for federal 

funds include a DUNS number in their applications for a new award or a supplement to an 

existing award. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the 

universal standard for identifying and differentiating entities receiving federal funds. The 

identifier is used for tracking purposes and to validate address and point of contact 

information for federal assistance applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. The DUNS 

number will be used throughout the grant life cycle. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, 

one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a 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 standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, recipients, 

and subrecipients. OJP requires all applicants (other than individuals) for federal financial 

assistance to maintain current registrations in the SAM database. Applicants must be 

registered in SAM to successfully register in Grants.gov. Applicants must update or renew 

their SAM registration annually to maintain an active status.
NIJ-2014-3756 23

Applications cannot be successfully submitted in Grants.gov until Grants.gov receives the

SAM registration information. The information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take up 

to 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. The applicant organization’s DUNS number must be used to complete this 

step. For more information about the registration process, go 

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

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

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

applicant organization’s AOR. 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 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-2014-3756.

6. Complete the Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. All applicants must complete this 

information. Applicants that expend any funds for lobbying activities must provide the 

detailed information requested on the form Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). 

Applicants that do not expend any funds for lobbying activities should enter “N/A” in the 

required highlighted fields. 

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 an e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The message will state 

whether the application has been received and validated, or 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 well 

ahead of the deadline provides time to correct the problem(s) that caused the 

rejection. Important: OJP urges applicants to submit applications 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.

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

timeframes. 

Note: Duplicate Applications

If an applicant submits multiple versions of an application, NIJ will review only the most recent 

valid version submitted. 
NIJ-2014-3756 24

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues

Applicants that experience unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond their control that 

prevent them from submitting their application by the deadline must e-mail the NIJ contact 

identified in the Contact Information section on page 1 within 24 hours after the application 

deadline and request approval to submit their application. The e-mail must describe the 

technical difficulties, and 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: NIJ does not automatically approve requests. After the program 

office reviews the submission, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to validate 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 applicant failed to follow all 

required procedures, which resulted in an untimely application submission, OJP will deny the 

applicant’s request to submit their application.

The following conditions generally are insufficient to justify late submissions:

• Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time.

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

website.

• Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation.

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

including firewalls.

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

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

Provide Feedback to OJP

To assist OJP in improving its application and award processes, we encourage applicants to 

provide feedback on this solicitation, the application submission process, and/or the application 

review/peer review process. Provide feedback to OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov.

IMPORTANT: This e-mail is for feedback and suggestions only. Replies are not sent from this 

mailbox. If you have specific questions on any program or technical aspect of the solicitation, 

you must directly contact the appropriate number or e-mail listed on the front of this solicitation 

document. These contacts are provided to help ensure that you can directly reach an individual 

who can address your specific questions in a timely manner.

If you are interested in being a reviewer for other OJP grant applications, please e-mail your 

resume to ojppeerreview@lmbps.com. The OJP Solicitation Feedback email account will not

forward your resume. Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization can be a peer 

reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization has submitted an application.
NIJ-2014-3756 25

Application Checklist

Research on “Sentinel Events” and Criminal Justice System Errors

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

What an Applicant Should Do:

Prior to Registering in Grants.gov:

_____ Acquire a DUNS Number (see page 22)

_____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 22)

To Register with Grants.gov: 

_____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 23)

_____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 23)

To Find Funding Opportunity:

_____ Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 23)

_____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package (see page 23)

_____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 22)

_____ Read Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov

General Requirements:

_____ Review “Other Requirements” webpage 

What an Application Should Include: 

_____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 9)

_____ Project Abstract (see page 10)

_____ Program Narrative (see page 10)

_____ Appendices (see page 12)

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 14)

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 14)

_____ Employee Compensation Waiver request and justification (if applicable)

(see page 7)

_____ Read OJP policy and guidance on “conference” approval, planning, and reporting

available at www.ojp.gov/funding/confcost.htm (see page 8)

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 23)

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

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

_____ Additional Attachments

_____ Bibliography/references

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

to the proposed study (if applicable)

_____ Curriculum vitae/resumes of principal investigator and any and all co-principal 

investigators

_____ List of all project staff members, contractors, and advisory board members; their 

professional affiliation; and titles or roles and responsibilities proposed for the 

project

_____ Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones

_____ Human Subjects Protection paperwork

_____ Privacy Certificate
NIJ-2014-3756 26

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

investigators

_____ Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project (if applicable)

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

has been submitted (if applicable)

_____ Data Archiving Plan

_____ Planned Scholarly Products

_____ Other potential dissemination outlets

_____ Other materials specified by the solicitation

_____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 15)

_____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 16)

_____ Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable) 

(see page 17)