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

Office of Justice Programs 

National Institute of Justice 

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

Justice (NIJ) is pleased to announce that it is seeking applications for funding an evaluation of 

the implementation of the Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS), a 

risk assessment measure developed by the state of Vermont that combines static and dynamic 

factors to predict sexual recidivism. This program furthers the Department’s mission by 

sponsoring research to provide objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to 

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

Evaluation of the Implementation of the Sex Offender 

Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS) 

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

dependent on the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations in future 

years. 

Deadline 

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

page 10.) All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 31, 2012. (See 

“Deadlines: Registration and Application,” page 4.) 

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.

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

except federal holidays. 

For assistance with any other requirements of this solicitation, contact Dr. Marie Garcia, Social 

Science Analyst, by telephone at 202–514–7128 or by e-mail at Marie.Garcia@usdoj.gov. 

Grants.gov number assigned to announcement: NIJ-2012-3169 

Release Date: April 5, 2012] 

SL 001012
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

2 

Contents

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

Deadlines: Registration and Application ....................................................................................... 4 

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

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

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

Notice of Post-Award FFATA Reporting Requirement .................................................................. 9 

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

What an Application Should Include ........................................................................................... 12 

Information to Complete the Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) ..................... 12 

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

Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative ............................................................. 15 

Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) .................................................................. 16 

Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) .................................................................... 16 

Other Standard Forms .................................................................................................... 17 

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

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

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

Provide Feedback to OJP on This Solicitation ............................................................................ 21 

Application Checklist ................................................................................................................... 22 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

3 

Evaluation of the Implementation of the Sex 

Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress 

Scale (SOTIPS) 

(CFDA No. 16.560) 

Overview 

As part of a collaborative effort with the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, 

Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART), NIJ seeks competitive proposals for a 

single award that will support an evaluation of the implementation of the Sex Offender 

Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS). Developed by the state of Vermont, 

SOTIPS combines static and dynamic risk measures into an overall assessment tool to predict 

sexual recidivism. It was hypothesized that SOTIPS, used in conjunction with the Static-99R, 

would better predict sexual recidivism than either type of measure (static or dynamic) alone. 

Results from a recent NIJ-funded evaluation found the combined static (Static-99R) and 

dynamic risk measure (SOTIPS) consistently predicted recidivism and outperformed either 

instrument when used alone. Based on these positive findings, SMART will fund the 

implementation of SOTIPS in up to three sites. The proposed evaluation should include an 

implementation and process evaluation, as well as an assessment of relevant outcome 

measures, including but not limited to treatment efficacy and recidivism. 

Applicants may refer to the following key sources of information: 

• Forthcoming FY 2012 SMART Office solicitation: Promoting Evidence Integration in Sex 

Offender Management: Implementation of the Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and 

Progress Scale (SOTIPS) 

• Final report for NIJ award 2008-DD-BX-0103, “A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex 

Offender Risk Assessment”

• SOTIPS scale

• Static-99R 

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

(sections 201 and 202); Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-55). 

 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

4 

 

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. The deadline to 

apply for funding under this announcement is 11:59 p.m. eastern time on May 31, 2012. See the 

“How to Apply” section on page 10 for details. 

Eligibility 

Refer to the title page for eligibility under this program. 

Program-Specific Information 

Heightened awareness of sex offenders in communities has increased the need for criminal 

justice professionals to better understand the risk sex offenders pose to reoffend. Risk 

assessment has become a critical strategy in managing sex offenders under community 

supervision as it may inform sentencing decisions, correctional programming, reentry, and 

effective post-incarceration supervision and treatment plans. Risk assessment strategies have 

evolved from a process based solely upon clinical judgment to modern approaches that 

incorporate scientifically tested, actuarial measures. 

Over the past two decades, there has been a dramatic increase in research on actuarial risk 

assessment instruments. Because most sexual offending is not reported to law enforcement 

and because of the difficulties inherent in predicting human behavior, it is hard to determine the 

true rate at which sex offenders will reoffend. The continued examination of risk assessment 

tools specific to this population, however, may optimize the benefits of these assessments in 

making placement or release decisions, triaging community supervision caseloads, and 

developing treatment strategies. 

SOTIPS, Vermont’s Sex Offender Treatment Intervention and Progress Scale, is a 16-item 

dynamic risk scale designed to aid clinicians and community supervision officers in identifying 

and monitoring the supervision and treatment needs of adult male sex offenders. SOTIPS is 

used in conjunction with the Static-99R1

, a ten-item actuarial assessment instrument that uses 

only static (unchangeable) factors shown to correlate with sexual recidivism. A recent NIJfunded evaluation of the two measures showed the combined assessment tools demonstrated 

improved predictive ability than either tool alone (McGrath, Lasher, & Cumming, 2011). 

In an effort to add to the research on how to appropriately assess, manage, and treat sex 

offenders, NIJ is soliciting proposals to conduct a systematic and comprehensive evaluation of 

the implementation of SOTIPS. The costs associated with the implementation of these 

measures will be funded by the SMART Office under a separate solicitation. Under the SMART 

Office solicitation, sites will be selected for funding based upon several factors, including their 

commitment to fully implement SOTIPS with fidelity, their use of a certified or accredited 

treatment model for sex offenders, and their commitment to adhere to the requirements of a full1

 Helmus, L., Babchishin, K. M., Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2009, October). Static-99R: Revised 

age weights. Retrieved February 20, 2012, from www.static99.org/pdfdocs/static99randage20091005.pdf for more information. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

5 

scale evaluation. The sites must currently use the Static-99R to assess sex offenders in their 

jurisdictions. 

The costs associated with the evaluation of the SOTIPS risk assessment tool will be funded by 

NIJ under this solicitation. Up to three sites will be selected and funded by the SMART Office for 

inclusion in this evaluation. The evaluation objectives are two-fold: (1) determine whether the 

combined dynamic and static risk assessment tools better predict sexual recidivism than either 

type of measure (static or dynamic) alone and (2) determine whether the tools can be 

implemented successfully in other jurisdictions. 

The grantee will be required to complete the following research activities: 

• Validate the use of the SOTIPS risk assessment measures at each site. The grantee will 

also be required to ensure the sample is assessed at regular intervals, for example, at 

entry into treatment and every six months. At least three assessments should be 

conducted for each offender using both risk assessment measures. Other 

responsibilities include, but are not limited to, verifying the size and characteristics of the 

population of interest, for example, demographics and risk level. 

• Verify the treatment model protocol for sex offenders in the selected jurisdictions and 

ensure the study sample is involved currently in treatment. Data should be collected on, 

but will not be limited to, the frequency, duration, modality and type of treatment 

received, provider to client ratio, and program delivery. 

The selected grantee will be responsible for the following: 

• Working collaboratively with NIJ and the SMART Office, as well as the training and 

technical assistance provider and selected sites, to track fidelity to the proposed 

research plan. This should include regularly scheduled conference calls with involved 

parties. 

• Verifying the data infrastructure and data collection abilities of the selected sites, and 

providing training on these issues, if applicable. 

• Conducting a process evaluation to determine whether SOTIPS and the Static-99R are 

delivered as intended to the target recipients by reviewing resources, caseflow, and 

other pertinent data. 

• Conducting an outcome evaluation, including a 12-month and 36-month follow-up study, 

to measure recidivism for all offenders who completed treatment. 

• Conducting an assessment of how the use of the combined risk assessment measures 

impacts the supervision of sex offenders in the selected jurisdictions. This may include 

both quantitative and qualitative components, for example, interviews with offenders, 

service providers, and community supervision officers. 

• Reporting and disseminating interim (12-month follow-up) and final study results (36-

month follow-up) 

Applicants, in their proposals, should demonstrate their ability to effectively measure the 

following outcomes: 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

6 

• Recidivism: For the purposes of this solicitation, recidivism is defined as all new charges 

for sexual, violent (sexual or non-sexual violence), or any other criminal offenses, and 

returns to prison within 12 months and 36 months of initial release. 

• Reduction in violations of conditions of supervised release. 

• Participation in sex offender treatment. 

• Usefulness (utility) of risks-needs assessment tools in the subsequent provision of 

services and the management of sex offenders. 

Because the sites for the evaluation have not yet been selected, the successful applicant to this 

evaluation solicitation will be required to submit a revised evaluation plan with proposed budget 

modifications as necessary. A special condition will be attached to the award stipulating that the 

grantee may not obligate, expend, or drawdown more than $30,000 until NIJ approves the 

revised evaluation plan and issues a Grant Adjustment Notice to remove or modify this special 

condition. 

Evidence-based Programs or Practices

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. OJP’s website www.crimesolutions.gov is one 

resource that applicants may use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal 

justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. 

Amount and length of awards: NIJ anticipates that up to a total of $1.5 million may become 

available for one (1) award made through this solicitation. All awards are subject to the 

availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements 

that may be imposed by law. 

Evaluation research: Within applications proposing evaluation research, funding priority will be 

given to experimental research designs that use random selection and assignment of 

participants to experimental and control conditions. When randomized designs are not feasible, 

priority will be given to quasi-experimental designs that include contemporary procedures such 

as Propensity Score Matching or Regression Discontinuity Design to address selection bias in 

evaluating outcomes and impacts.

Evaluations that also include measurements of program fidelity and implementation as part of a 

thorough process assessment are desirable. Measurements of program fidelity should be 

included as part of an assessment of program processes and operations to ensure that policies, 

programs, and technologies are implemented as designed. As one aspect of a comprehensive 

evaluation, assessments of program processes should include objective measurements and 

qualitative observations of programs as they are actually implemented and of services that are 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

7 

delivered. These may include assessment of such aspects as adherence to program content 

and protocol, quantity and duration, quality of delivery, and participant responsiveness. 

Proposed evaluation research designs with multiple units of analysis and multiple 

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

are necessary to effectively address issues of generalizability and representativeness of 

findings. 

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

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

evaluation research. 

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

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

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

What will not be funded: 

1. Provision of training or direct service. 

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

these items if they are necessary to conduct applied research, development, demonstration, 

evaluation, or analysis.) 

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

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

of this solicitation. 

Budget Information 

Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver 

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

may not be used to pay total cash compensation (salary plus bonuses) to any employee of the 

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

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

Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year. The 2012 salary table for SES 

employees is available at www.opm.gov/oca/12tables/indexSES.asp. Note: A recipient may 

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

limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Any such additional compensation will not be 

considered matching funds where match requirements apply.) 

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

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

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

the applicant submits a waiver request and justification with the application, the applicant should 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

8 

Minimization of Conference Costs 

No OJP funding can be used to purchase food and/or beverages for any meeting, conference, 

training, or other event. Exceptions to this restriction may be made only in cases where such 

sustenance is not otherwise available (i.e., extremely remote areas), or where a special 

presentation at a conference requires a plenary address where there is no other time for 

sustenance to be obtained. Such an exception would require prior approval from OJP. This 

restriction does not apply to water provided at no cost, but does apply to any and all other 

refreshments, regardless of the size or nature of the meeting. Additionally, this restriction does 

not impact direct payment of per diem amounts to individuals in a travel status under the 

organization’s travel policy. 

Updated Department of Justice and OJP guidance on conference planning, minimization of 

costs, and conference cost reporting will be forthcoming and will be accessible on the OJP 

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

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 by individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable costs. 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 

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

Match Requirement 

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

Performance Measures 

To assist the Department 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, applicants that receive funding under this solicitation must provide data 

that measure the results of their work done under this solicitation. Any award recipient will be 

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

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

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

solicitation are as follows: 

 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

9 

Objective Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides

Develop and analyze 

information and data having 

clear implications for 

criminal justice policy and 

practice in the United 

States.

1. Relevance to the needs 

of the field as measured 

by whether the 

grantee’s substantive 

scope did not deviate 

from the funded 

proposal or any 

subsequent agency 

modifications to the 

scope. 

2. Quality of the research 

as assessed by peer 

reviewers. 

3. Quality of the 

management as 

measured by whether 

significant interim 

project milestones were 

met, and costs 

remained within 

approved limits. 

4. If applicable, number of 

NIJ final grant reports, 

NIJ research 

documents, and grantee 

research documents 

published. 

1. A final report providing 

a comprehensive 

overview of the project 

and a detailed 

description of the 

project design, data, 

and methods; a full 

presentation of scientific 

findings; and a thorough 

discussion of the 

implications of the 

project findings for 

criminal justice practice 

and policy in the United 

States. 

2. Quarterly updates 

describing the 

evaluation progress 

including descriptions of 

program 

implementation, clients 

served, and other 

relevant process 

information to be 

determined by NIJ. 

3. Quarterly financial 

reports, semi-annual 

progress reports, and a 

final progress report. 

4. If applicable, each data 

set that was collected, 

acquired, or modified in 

conjunction with the 

project. 

5. If applicable, citation to 

report(s)/document(s). 

Notice of Post-Award FFATA Reporting Requirement 

Applicants should anticipate that OJP will require all recipients (other than individuals) of awards 

of $25,000 or more under this solicitation, consistent with the Federal Funding Accountability 

and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), to report award information on any first-tier subawards 

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

compensation of the five most highly compensated executives of the recipient and first-tier 

subrecipients. Each applicant entity must ensure that it has the necessary processes and 

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

regarding subawards will be made through the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS), 

found at www.fsrs.gov/. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

10 

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

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

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

How to Apply 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

an application package by the specified application deadline. 

All applicants are required to complete the following steps: 

1. Acquire a 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 renewal of 

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

universal standard for identifying and keeping track of entities receiving federal funds. 

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

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

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

one-time activity. Obtain a DUNS number by calling Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–

5711 or by applying online at www.dnb.com. A DUNS number is usually received within 

1-2 business days. 

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

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

assistance maintain current registrations in the CCR database. An applicant must be 

registered in the CCR to successfully register in Grants.gov. The CCR database is the 

repository for standard information about federal financial assistance applicants, 

recipients, and subrecipients. Organizations that have previously submitted applications 

via Grants.gov are already registered with CCR, as it is a requirement for Grants.gov 

registration. Note, however, that applicants must update or renew their CCR 

registration annually to maintain an active status. Information about CCR registration 

procedures can be accessed at www.ccr.gov. 

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

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

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

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

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

 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

11 

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 there can be more than one AOR for the 

organization.

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-2012-3169. 

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

information. An applicant that expends any funds for lobbying activities must provide the 

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

An applicant that does not expend any funds for lobbying activities should enter “N/A” in 

the required highlighted fields. 

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

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

applicant should receive an e-mail validation message from Grants.gov. The validation 

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

with an explanation. Important: Applicants are urged to submit applications at least 72 

hours prior to the due date of the application to allow time to receive the validation 

message and to correct any problems that may have caused a rejection notification. 

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

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

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

“.exe,” “.vbs,” “.cfg,” “.dat,” “.db,” “.dbf,” “.dll,” “.ini,” “.log,” “.ora,” “.sys,” and “.zip.” 

Note: Duplicate Applications

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

version submitted. 

Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues 

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

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

NIJ contact identified in the Contact Information section on the title page within 24 hours after 

the application deadline and request approval to submit its application. The applicant must 

include in the e-mail: a description of the technical difficulties, a timeline of submission efforts, 

the complete grant application, the applicant DUNS number, and Grants.gov Help Desk tracking 

number(s) the applicant has received. Note: Requests are not automatically approved by 

NIJ. After the program office reviews all of the information submitted, and contacts the 

Grants.gov Help Desk to validate the technical issues reported, OJP will contact the applicant to 

either approve or deny the request to submit a late application. If the technical issues reported 

cannot be validated, the application will be rejected as untimely. 

The following conditions are not valid reasons to permit late submissions: (1) failure to begin the 

registration process in sufficient time, (2) failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

12 

register and apply as posted on its Web site, (3) failure to follow all of the instructions in the OJP 

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

technology (IT) environment, 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.gov/funding/solicitations.htm. 

What an Application Should Include 

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

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

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

use of award funds pending satisfaction of the conditions. 

Moreover, applicants should anticipate that applications that are unresponsive to the scope of 

the solicitation, or that do not include application elements designated by NIJ 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 and budget narrative, and resumes/curriculum vitae of key personnel. The Budget 

Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet may be combined in one document. However, if only 

one document is submitted, it must contain both narrative and detail information. 

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

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

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

a single file. 

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

The SF–424 is a standard form required for use as a cover sheet for submission of preapplications, applications, and related information. Grants.gov and GMS take information 

from the applicant’s profile to populate the fields on this form. When selecting "type of 

applicant," if the applicant is a for-profit entity, select "For-Profit Organization" or "Small 

Business" (as applicable). 

2. Program Narrative 

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

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

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

narrative section. 

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

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

Program Narrative Guidelines: 

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

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

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

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

 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

13 

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

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

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

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

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

addressing research questions, data collection procedures and instrumentation, 

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

should also describe procedures for data analysis and all expected products, 

including interim and final reports, instrumentation, and devices. If applicable, it 

should describe the subjects who will be involved in the proposed project, 

including the number of participants; participants’ age, gender, and race/ethnicity; 

and other pertinent characteristics, such as methods used to gain access to 

subjects. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

inserted after the abstract. 

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

narrative limit). 

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

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

narrative: 

• Statement of the Problem. 

• Project/Program Design and Implementation. 

• Capabilities/Competencies. 

• Impact/Outcomes and Evaluation. 

• Dissemination Strategy. 

Within these sections, the narrative should address: 

• Purpose, goals, and objectives. 

• Review of relevant literature. 

• Detailed description of research design and methods to include: 

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

etc. 

• Implications for criminal justice policy and practice in the United 

States. 

• Management plan and organization. 

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

• Bibliography/references. 

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

pertaining to the proposed study. 

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

• Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

14 

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

below). 

• Human Subjects Protection Paperwork including Institutional Review 

Board (IRB) documentation and forms (see 

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

• Privacy Certificate (for further guidance go to 

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

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

investigator(s). 

• Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from 

organizations collaborating in the project, such as law enforcement 

and correctional agencies (if applicable). 

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

proposal has been submitted (if applicable). 

• Other materials specified by the solicitation. 

• Data archiving plan (see descriptive paragraph below).

Data Archiving Plan: Applications should include a brief plan to comply with data archiving 

requirements. The plan should be one or two pages in length and include a description of the 

proposed data management and archiving process including confidentiality protections and level 

of effort associated with meeting archiving requirements. Associated tasks should be reflected 

in the proposed project budget and budget narrative sections of the application. 

In most instances, NIJ requires that data resulting from funded research be submitted as grant 

products or deliverables for archiving with the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data 

(NACJD) (www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/archive.jsp). The purpose of the Data 

Archiving Plan is to demonstrate recognition by applicants that data sets resulting from the 

proposed research are required to be submitted as grant products for archiving according to 

special grant conditions. Along with other grant products, special conditions require that all 

research data be submitted 90 days before the end of the project period. Some amount of grant 

award funds is typically withheld for submission of research data along with the final report and 

other products/deliverables. 

The plan should be submitted as an appendix labeled, “Data Archiving Plan.” The number of 

pages used for the plan will not count against the narrative page limit. The plan should provide 

brief details about the proposed archiving process including submission of these files: qualitative 

and quantitative data, final technical reports, instrumentation and data collection forms, and the 

privacy certificate and informed consent protocols including protections for confidentiality (where 

applicable). The focus of the Data Archiving Plan is to describe how the grant data products will 

be prepared and documented so as to allow reproduction of the project’s findings as well as 

future research that can extend the scientific value of the original project (See: 

www.icpsr.umich.edu/files/ICPSR/access/dataprep.pdf). 

Specifically, the Data Archiving Plan includes: 

• Information regarding data formats (quantitative/qualitative/spatial) and software with 

which data will be collected, entered into a database, stored, analyzed and transferred. 

Standard commercial software or software typically acceptable to NACJD should be 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

15 

identified for use in the proposed data collection 

(www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/NACJD/archiving/deposit-nij-data.jsp). 

• A description of procedures by which the applicant plans to collect data along with 

anticipated units of analysis (e.g., individuals, locations), level of analysis and other 

identifiers for each data file that will be submitted upon completion of the funded 

research. 

• If the proposed research includes collection of information identifiable to private persons 

o A description of all assurances of confidentiality made to those persons 

o A copy of the consent form that was utilized 

o A copy of the Privacy Certificate (as submitted to and approved by the funding 

agency) 

o IRB approval documentation 

o Any information transfer agreement that was utilized to transfer the data with 

identifiers. 

• Any anticipated variable creation, data transformations or scale construction that may be 

critical to the interpretation or analysis of the data by others. 

• A plan for submission of computer programming code or software syntax providing detail 

on how the data will be processed including any significant treatments of the data such 

as de-identification, imputation, filtering or weighting. 

• A description of the technical documentation (e.g., data dictionary or codebook) that 

explains how variables will be designated in the data file(s), such as the use of variable 

naming conventions and variable groups, missing data/value designations, variable and

category/value labels, operational definitions and citations as needed for these variables. 

• Contact information for the Principal Investigator in the event other researchers should 

need more information about the study or the data. 

3. Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative 

a. Budget Detail Worksheet 

A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at 

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

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

included. 

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

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. Proposed budgets are expected to 

be complete; reasonable and allowable; cost effective; and necessary for project 

activities. The narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond with the 

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

should explain how all costs were estimated and calculated and how they are 

relevant to the completion of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

16 

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

Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative should be broken down by year. 

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

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

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

support for the project. The application should identify generally any such 

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, the match amount 

incorporated into the OJP-approved budget becomes mandatory and subject to 

audit. 

4. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 5. Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

should include a resolution (or comparable legal documentation, as may be applicable) 

from all tribes that will be included as a part of the services/assistance provided under 

the grant. A consortium of tribes for which existing consortium bylaws allow action 

without support from all tribes in the consortium (i.e., without authorizing resolution or 

other enactment of each tribal governing body) may submit a copy of its consortium 

bylaws with the application in lieu of tribal resolutions (or comparable legal 

documentation). 

If an applicant is unable to obtain and submit with its application a fully-executed (i.e., 

signed) copy of a tribal resolution or other, comparable legal documentation as may be 

consistent with the tribe’s governance structure, then, at minimum, the applicant should 

submit an unsigned, draft version of such legal documentation as part of its application 

(except in cases where, with respect to a tribal consortium applicant, consortium bylaws 

allow action without the support of all consortium member tribes). If selected for funding, 

use of and access to funds will be contingent on receipt of the fully-executed tribal 

resolution or other, comparable legal documentation. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

17 

6. Other Standard Forms

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

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

receipt of funds may be contingent upon submission of all necessary forms. Note in 

particular the following forms. 

a. Standard Assurances

Applicants must read, certify, and submit this form in GMS prior to the receipt 

of any award funds. 

b. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other 

Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements 

Applicants must read, certify, and submit this form in GMS prior to the receipt 

of any award funds. 

c. Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire 

(required for any applicant other than an individual that is a non-governmental 

entity and that has not received any award from OJP within the past 3 years; 

this form must be downloaded, completed, and submitted). 

Selection Criteria 

Statement of the Problem (Understanding of the problem and its importance)—15%

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

1. Awareness of the state of current research. 

2. Soundness of methods and analytic and technical approach. 

3. Feasibility of proposed project and awareness of pitfalls. 

4. Innovation and creativity (when appropriate). 

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

applicants)—20%

1. Qualifications and experience of proposed staff. 

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

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

and resources are used. 

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

Budget—15% 

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

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

 3. Use of existing resources to conserve costs. 

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

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

2. Potential for significant advances in the field. 

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

in the United States and improving public safety, security, and quality of life. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

18 

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

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

technology). 

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

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

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

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

collaborate with practitioners and policymakers. The application may include letters showing 

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

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

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

broader implications for other communities nationwide. 

Dissemination Strategy—5% 

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

including researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. 

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

practitioners and policymakers. 

 

Research Independence and Integrity 

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

applicant’s proposal must demonstrate research independence, including appropriate 

safeguards to ensure research objectivity and integrity. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

explanation of why it believes that to be the case. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

remedies to control any such factors. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

19 

Review Process 

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

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

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

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

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

a combination, to review the applications under this solicitation. An external peer reviewer is an 

expert in the 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. Applications that meet basic minimum requirements will be evaluated, 

scored, and rated by a peer review panel. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting 

recommendations are advisory only. In addition to peer review ratings, considerations for award 

recommendations and decisions may include, but are not limited to, underserved populations, 

geographic diversity, strategic priorities, past performance, and available funding. 

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

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

financial capability of applicants; examines proposed costs to determine if the Budget Detail 

Worksheet and Budget Narrative accurately explain project costs; and determines whether 

costs are reasonable, necessary, and allowable under applicable federal cost principles and 

agency regulations. 

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

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

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

awards. 

Additional Requirements 

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

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

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

information for each requirement can be found at 

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

• Civil Rights Compliance 

• Faith-Based and Other Community Organizations 

• Confidentiality 

• Research and the Protection of Human Subjects 

• Anti-Lobbying Act 

• Financial and Government Audit Requirements 

• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

20 

• DOJ Information Technology Standards (if applicable) 

• Single Point of Contact Review 

• Non-Supplanting of State or Local Funds 

• Criminal Penalty for False Statements 

• Compliance with Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide

• Suspension or Termination of Funding 

• Nonprofit Organizations 

• For-profit Organizations 

• Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

• Rights in Intellectual Property 

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

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

• Active CCR Registration 

If a proposal is funded, the award recipient will be required to submit several reports and other 

materials, including: 

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

and should include a detailed description of the project design, data, and methods; a full 

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

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

United States; etc. It must contain an abstract of no more than 600 words and an executive 

summary of 2,500 to 4,000 words. 

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

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

reviews will be forwarded to the principal investigator with suggestions for revisions. The author 

must then submit the revised final report, abstract, and executive summary by the end date of 

the grant. The abstract, executive summary, and final report must be submitted in electronic 

format. 

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

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

Office of Management and Budget Circular A–133. Future awards and fund drawdowns may be 

withheld if reports are delinquent. 

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

or collected for the funded project, and any artifact associated with the project data. Included 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

21 

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

proposal. 

Provide Feedback to OJP on This Solicitation 

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

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

review/peer review process. Feedback can be provided to 

OJPSolicitationFeedback@usdoj.gov. 
NIJ-2012-3169

OMB No. 1121-0329 

Approval Expires 02/28/2013 

 

22 

Application Checklist 

Evaluation of the Implementation of the Sex Offender Treatment 

Intervention and Progress Scale (SOTIPS) 

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

What an Application Should Include: 

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

_____ Program Narrative (see page 12) 

_____ Appendices to the Program Narrative (see page 13) 

_____ Bibliography/references. 

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

the proposed study. 

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

_____ Project timeline and research calendar with expected milestones. 

_____ Research independence and integrity 

_____ Human Subjects Protection Paperwork 

_____ Privacy Certificate 

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

investigator(s). 

_____ Letters of cooperation/support or administrative agreements from organizations 

collaborating in the project 

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

has been submitted 

_____ Data Archiving Plan 

_____ Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 15) 

_____ Budget Narrative (see page 15) 

_____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 11) 

_____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 16) 

_____ Tribal Authorizing Resolution (if applicable) (see page 16) 

_____ Other Standard Forms as applicable (see pages 17) including: 

 _____ Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (if applicable)