Smart Prosecution Initiative RFP 2017

OMB No. 1121-0329 U.S. Department of Justice Approval Expires 12/31/2018 Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Assistance The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) is seeking applications for the Smart Prosecution Initiative Training and Technical Assistance Program. This program furthers the Department’s mission by delivering nationwide training and technical assistance to aid state and local jurisdictions in reducing crime and improving the criminal justice system. The Smart Prosecution Initiative Training and Technical Assistance Program FY 2017 Competitive Grant Announcement Application Due: January 26, 2017 Eligibility Eligible applicants are limited to any national nonprofit organization, for-profit (commercial) organization (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), or institution of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education) that have expertise and experience in managing training and technical assistance for evidence-based criminal justice programs. In addition, the applicant must show the capacity to provide technical expertise in implementing action research partnerships between criminal justice researchers and practitioners. For-profit organizations (as well as other recipients) (including tribal institutions of higher education) must forgo any profit or management fee. BJA welcomes applications under which two or more entities would carry out the federal award; however, only one entity may be the applicant. Any others must be proposed subrecipients (“subgrantees”).1 The applicant must be the entity that would have primary responsibility for carrying out the award, including administering the funding and managing the SMART PROSECUTION Training and Technical Assistance Program. Under this solicitation, only one application by any particular applicant entity will be considered. An entity may, however, be proposed as a subrecipient (‘subgrantee”) in more than one application. BJA may elect to fund applications submitted under this FY 2017 solicitation in future fiscal years, dependent on, among other considerations, the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations. 1 For additional information on subawards, see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application and Submission Information.  Deadline Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on January 26, 2017. To be considered timely, an application must be submitted by the application deadline using Grants.gov, and the applicant must have received a validation message from Grants.gov that indicates successful and timely submission. OJP urges applicants to submit applications at least 72 hours prior to the application due date, in order to allow time for the applicant to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a rejection notification. OJP encourages all applicants to read this Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov. For additional information, see How to Apply in Section D. Application and Submission Information. Contact Information For technical assistance with submitting an application, contact the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800–518–4726 or 606–545–5035, or via email to support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Support Hotline operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on federal holidays. For assistance with any unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond an applicant’s control that prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline, or any other requirement of this solicitation, contact the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) Response Center: toll-free at 800–851–3420; via TTY at 301–240–6310 (hearing impaired only); email grants@ncjrs.gov; fax to 301–240–5830; or web chat at https://webcontact.ncjrs.gov/ncjchat/chat.jsp. The NCJRS Response Center hours of operation are 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, and 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. eastern time on the solicitation close date. Additional information on reporting technical issues appears under “Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues” in the How to Apply section. Grants.gov number assigned to this announcement: BJA-2017-11200 Release date: December 8, 2016 BJA-2017-11200 2 Contents A. Program Description .............................................................................................................. 4 Overview ................................................................................................................................ 4 Program-Specific Information ................................................................................................. 4 Evidence-Based Programs or Practices ................................................................................. 8 B. Federal Award Information..................................................................................................... 9 Type of Award........................................................................................................................ 9 Financial Management and System of Internal Controls......................................................... 9 Budget Information................................................................................................................10 Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement.................................................................................10 Pre-Agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs).......................................................10 Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver ..............................10 Prior Approval, Planning, and Reporting of Conference/Meeting/Training Costs ...................11 Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) ..................................................11 C. Eligibility Information.............................................................................................................11 D. Application and Submission Information ...............................................................................11 What an Application Should Include......................................................................................11 How to Apply .........................................................................................................................23 E. Application Review Information.............................................................................................26 Review Criteria......................................................................................................................26 Review Process ....................................................................................................................28 F. Federal Award Administration Information ............................................................................29 Federal Award Notices..........................................................................................................29 Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements.............................................30 General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements .............................30 G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) ...................................................................................31 H. Other Information..................................................................................................................31 Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act .........................................................................31 Provide Feedback to OJP .....................................................................................................32 Application Checklist .............................................................................................................33 BJA-2017-11200 3 The Smart Prosecution Initiative Training and Technical Assistance Program (CFDA #16.825) A. Program Description Overview BJA’s “Smart Suite” of programs invest in the development of practitioner-researcher partnerships that use data, evidence, and innovation to create strategies and interventions that are effective and economical. This data-driven approach enables jurisdictions to understand the full nature and extent of the crime challenges they are facing and to target resources to the highest priorities. The Smart Suite of programs represents a strategic approach that brings more “science” into criminal justice operations by leveraging innovative applications of analysis, technology, and evidence-based practices with the goal of improving performance and effectiveness while containing costs. As part of BJA’s Smart Suite, the Smart Prosecution Initiative (SMART PROSECUTION) seeks to build upon analysis-driven, evidence-based prosecution practices by encouraging state, local, and tribal prosecutorial agencies to develop effective, economical, and innovative responses to crime within their jurisdictions. The purpose of this FY 2017 competitive grant announcement is to select one provider to deliver, nationwide, a wide range of training and technical assistance (TTA) services to agencies participating in Smart Prosecution. These services include, but are not limited to, training sessions and educational sessions developed and conducted by relevant subject matter experts, onsite or remote guidance on problem analysis, solution development, data analysis, prosecution theory, evaluation methodology, and other matters relevant to the purposes of the Smart Prosecution Program. Smart Prosecution agencies will leverage the TTA services solicited through this competitive grant announcement to implement solutions to pressing crime problems and prosecutorial organizational challenges that hamper their effectiveness. The services provided should enhance the quality and outcomes of Smart Prosecution projects. Statutory Authority: This program is typically funded under the annual Department of Justice appropriation to “enhance prosecutorial decision-making” and potentially includes funds set aside for training and technical assistance programs. Any awards under this solicitation would be made under statutory authority provided by a full-year appropriations act for FY 2017. As of the writing of this solicitation, the Department of Justice is operating under a short-term "Continuing Resolution;” no full-year appropriation for the Department has been enacted for FY 2017. Program-Specific Information Through Smart Prosecution, BJA provides resources, training, and technical assistance to enable prosecutorial agencies to identify and define their most pressing crime problems and institute lasting cultural and organizational changes that foster reliance on and effective use of evidence-based practices, data, and technology to address those problems. Examples of previous SMART PROSECUTION project outcomes are as follow: • In San Diego (CA), a coalition of criminal justice partners led by the City Attorney’s Office is developing the San Diego Community Court, a new post-plea diversion 4 BJA-2017-11200 initiative designed to provide accountability, early intervention, and swift consequences for eligible misdemeanor offenders. • In Kings County (NY), the District Attorney’s Office is creating a comprehensive approach to adolescent and young adult prosecution including a Young Adult Court to handle defendants up to age 24. • In St. Louis (MO), the Circuit Attorney is implementing GunStat, a strategy to reduce gun crime whereby all criminal justice agencies collaborate in the investigation and prosecution of gun cases. In addition, the office will establish a diversion program targeting felony defendants most likely to carry a weapon illegally as those likely to reoffend or to perpetuate gun violence. • In Baltimore (MD), the Office of the State’s Attorney is developing an automated evidence-based risk assessment to evaluate defendants charged at Central Booking, make evidence-based release recommendations, and identify defendants for diversion and alternative to incarceration programs. • In San Francisco (CA), the District Attorney’s Office is establishing a Crime Strategies and Intelligence Unit. BJA’s competitively funded TTA partner is expected to work closely with BJA and individual Smart Prosecution sites to ensure their initiative’s effectiveness and success. Throughout the life of their projects, the Smart Prosecution TTA Program provides sites with opportunities to participate in information sharing sessions, facilitate peer-to-peer exchanges of information, access subject matter expertise that is relevant to specific Smart Prosecution agencies, and produce reports on the lessons learned from the Smart Prosecution community of practice. For more information on SMART PROSECUTION and the Smart Suite, visit www.bja.gov/CRPPE/SmartSuite. Information on SMART PROSECUTION agency participants and current TTA resources may also be found at www.smartprosecution.org. Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables As prosecutors implement innovative, best practices, or evidence-based approaches to address the goals listed below, there is a need to evaluate their efforts. Smart Prosecution seeks to encourage exploration of new solutions to public safety concerns, as well as internal operations and organizational structure, while employing research partners at the problem definition stage through assessment of strategies and solutions. Some creative solutions developed by prosecutors around the country include changing how their organizations prioritize cases, using zone/geographic prosecution, using crime analysis tools to reduce gun violence, crime prevention through environmental design, drug-free and prostitute-free zones, restorative justice, community courts, truancy abatement, diversion programs, crime analysis, and cyber- crime strategies to improve public safety. Prosecutors are becoming partnership builders who bring the police, the community, and other criminal justice and local agencies together to find ways they can work together to solve problems in their jurisdictions. The purpose of Smart Prosecution is to develop a body of knowledge about data-driven strategies—innovative, best practice, or evidenced-based—as they are implemented by prosecutors. BJA is seeking applications from state, local, or tribal prosecutor agencies interested in testing data-driven approaches that address one or more of the three goals listed below. 5 BJA-2017-11200 • Promoting fair, impartial, and expeditious pursuit of justice; • Ensuring safe communities; and • Promoting integrity in the prosecution profession and effective coordination in the criminal justice system. Applications are solicited for a TTA provider with extensive TTA expertise, experience, and knowledge related to these goals and objectives. The Smart Prosecution TTA Program should include training, technical assistance, and guidance that addresses the management, organization, and project implementation needs of the Smart Prosecution grantees. It can also include mentoring by other experts in program implementation and management. At a minimum, the TTA provider shall ensure that its efforts are framed around supporting the development of each site’s strategy for instituting and testing unique approaches to chronic and/or emerging crime problems and the grantee’s capacity to achieve results. Applicants should address how they will produce the following deliverables: • Provide ongoing TTA (both remote and onsite) to existing and future2 Smart grantees throughout the duration of their Smart Prosecution grant awards. o DescribeaplantoassessandsupportindividualSmartProsecutiongranteeand research partner TTA needs, including the site’s capacity to perform sophisticated data and technology analysis and action research. The plan should detail a framework, methodologies, and timeline that will be used to guide the problem analysis and implementation phases of each site’s Smart Prosecution strategy. At a minimum, the plan shall ensure that assistance is available to grantees related to: use of data to validate the nature and extent of crime and drivers of crime; evaluation methodology; research partnership management; the identification and employment of promising and evidence-based practices; and strategic communication planning for Smart Prosecution strategy implementation. The plan should also discuss how the TTA provider will evaluate the TTA provided (e.g., follow up surveys, pre-post phone data collection), how peer-to-peer learning opportunities will be encouraged across sites, and how specialized assistance will be provided to strategize responses to precipitous increases in crime, where applicable. o ProposeaprocesstoidentifyanddelivertailoredTTAplansforexistingandfuture grantee sites and their research partners, including the proposed method of TTA delivery, timeline for delivery, and audience. Any TTA plans must be approved by both BJA and the grantee before implementation, and must address how the TTA program will assist individual sites in sustaining and expanding the use of successful strategies and practices tested in the Smart project within their organizations at the completion of the grant period. Once TTA plans are approved, implement the TTA plan, providing timely and high quality services consistent with the plan. Coordinate with BJA in ongoing analysis and refinement to the TTA efforts, assist BJA with ongoing assessment of Smart Prosecution site progress, and work with BJA to review final project evaluation reports, as well as other deliverables. 2 As of FY 2016, there are approximately 12 active Smart Prosecution sites. In FY 2017, BJA estimates three additional new sites will receive awards. To view the site-based solicitation, go to https://www.bja.gov/SmartProsecution17. 6 BJA-2017-11200 o DescribeaplantoassistindividualSmartProsecutiongranteeorganizationsin disseminating information and updates about Smart Prosecution goals, practices and project progress throughout their organizations. Such plans should address how the TTA provider will facilitate consistent project information sharing with key agency components throughout the life of individual Smart Prosecution projects, with the objective of increasing knowledge and understanding of the value of research and evidenced-based practice at all levels of the prosecutorial organization. o Recruit,maintain,anduseapoolofsubjectmatterexpertstoassistwithTTA delivery and provide any needed expertise or guidance on a range of issues, including but not limited to, crime issues, crime and data analysis, technology, crime strategy units, intelligence, alternatives to incarceration, violence reduction, research partnership development, research design and methodology, identification of available data sources, data analysis, facilitating partnerships with relevant stakeholders, technology implementation, performance metrics, the review of grantee deliverables, and the dissemination of best practices and research findings. NOTE: Applicants must identify—by name and through commitment letters— a cadre of subject matter experts in each of these areas to be considered under this solicitation. These commitment letters must clearly identify the subject matter expert’s previous experience and what will assistance will be provided to the sites under this cooperative agreement. • In close coordination with BJA, plan and conduct national and/or regional meetings, workshops, or other educational sessions for existing and other Smart Prosecution sites during the 24-month project period. BJA asks that applicants propose a plan for meetings that best aligns with their overall TTA approach. • Create and maintain a dynamic, up-to-date and interactive platform for electronic and new media to include the maintenance of the Smart Prosecution website, online newsletter, webinars, social media, videos, and blogging opportunities. Provide online resources, materials, and limited assistance (via phone or email) that is available to both Smart Prosecution sites, prosecutorial agencies, and the general public regarding Smart Prosecution, lessons learned and related issues. Describe how these materials and web platform will be kept current, in terms of substantive information and technology. Access, review, and preserve existing Smart Prosecution materials and literature and transition, as necessary, to an upgraded and/or new web-based platform under the new cooperative agreement. • Upon BJA’s recommendation and approval, meet and collaborate with other Smart Suite Program contacts, other BJA programs, and other federal agencies to enhance resources and knowledge as well as leverage respective expertise of partners to respond to the needs of the field and to collaborate and coordinate services and technical support across offices and departments. • Create a resources and product production plan that aligns with the TTA delivery plan and considers how to best reach the Smart Prosecution sites, including hard copy materials and web-based resources. BJA strongly encourages the use of distance learning opportunities such as webinars. 7 BJA-2017-11200 • Create and produce various documents and materials that highlight a wide range of Smart Prosecution site accomplishments, research reports, and results to be shared across a broad spectrum of audiences (for example, other Smart Prosecution sites, criminal justice researchers, and policymakers). Describe what these materials might be and how they will be disseminated widely and contribute to the translation of research findings into prosecution practice. • Host weekly update meetings with and submit bi-monthly progress reports to BJA for the duration of the Smart Prosecution grant, using a consistent format that summarizes the major activities and accomplishments during the reporting period, and provide information for each project task regarding significant findings and events, problems encountered, suggested solutions, and staff used. The provider will also specify in the reports the extent to which the project is on schedule. The TTA provider will be required to participate in BJA’s GrantStat and associated processes for specified grantees. Through GrantStat and its associated processes, BJA management and staff examine the performance of the grant programs funded by BJA by tracking grantee or program performance along several key indicators. GrantStat and its associated processes call for the collection and analysis of performance data and other relevant grant-level information that enables BJA as well as our TTA partners to be held accountable for the grantee’s and program’s performance as measured against the program’s goals and objectives. This process also provides BJA a means to coordinate with the TTA partner to identify needs and plans to respond to these needs for the TTA partner and specific grantees. In addition, the TTA provider will be required to assist grantees in the collection of performance measure data, working in collaboration with the local research partners. The Goals, Objectives and Deliverables are directly related to the performance measures set out in the table in Section D. Application and Submission Information, under "Program Narrative." Evidence-Based Programs or Practices OJP strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program development in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. OJP is committed to: • Improving the quantity and quality of evidence OJP generates. • Integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the field. • Improving the translation of evidence into practice. OJP considers programs and practices to be evidence-based when their effectiveness has been demonstrated by causal evidence, generally obtained through one or more outcome evaluations. Causal evidence documents a relationship between an activity or intervention (including technology) and its intended outcome, including measuring the direction and size of a change, and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention. Causal evidence depends on the use of scientific methods to rule out, to the extent possible, alternative explanations for the documented change. The strength of causal evidence, based on the factors described above, will influence the degree to which OJP considers a program or practice to be evidence-based. The OJP CrimeSolutions.gov website is one resource that applicants may use to find information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. 8 BJA-2017-11200 B. Federal Award Information BJA estimates that it will make up to one award of up to $750,000 for a 24-month period of performance, beginning on October 1, 2017. BJA may, in certain cases, provide additional funding in future years to awards made under this solicitation, through supplemental awards. In making decisions regarding supplemental awards, OJP will consider, among other factors, the availability of appropriations, OJP’s strategic priorities, and OJP’s assessment of both the management of the award (for example, timeliness and quality of progress reports), and the progress of the work funded under the award. All awards are subject to the availability of appropriated funds and to any modifications or additional requirements that may be imposed by law. Type of Award BJA expects that any award under this solicitation will be made in the form of a cooperative agreement, which is a type of award that provides for OJP to have substantial involvement in carrying out award activities. See Administrative, National Policy, and Other Legal Requirements, under Section F. Federal Award Administration Information, for a brief discussion of what may constitute substantial federal involvement. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Award recipients and subrecipients (including recipients or subrecipients that are pass-through entities3) must, as described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements4 set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.303: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that [the recipient (and any subrecipient)] is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. (c) Evaluate and monitor [the recipient’s (and any subrecipient’s)] compliance with statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of Federal awards. 3 For purposes of this solicitation (or program announcement), “pass-through entity” includes any entity eligible to receive funding as a recipient or subrecipient under this solicitation (or program announcement) that, if funded, may make a subaward(s) to a subrecipient(s) to carry out part of the funded program. 4 The "Part 200 Uniform Requirements” means the DOJ regulation at 2 C.F.R Part 2800, which adopts (with certain modifications) the provisions of 2 C.F.R. Part 200. 9 BJA-2017-11200 (d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including noncompliance identified in audit findings. (e) Take reasonable measures to safeguard protected personally identifiable information and other information the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity designates as sensitive or [the recipient (or any subrecipient)] considers sensitive consistent with applicable Federal, state, local, and tribal laws regarding privacy and obligations of confidentiality. To help ensure that applicants understand applicable administrative requirements and cost principles, OJP encourages prospective applicants to enroll, at no charge, in the DOJ Grants Financial Management Online Training, available here. Budget Information Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement This solicitation does not require a match. However, if a successful application proposes a voluntary match amount, and OJP approves the budget, the total match amount incorporated into the approved budget becomes mandatory and subject to audit. Pre-Agreement Costs (also known as Pre-award Costs) Pre-agreement costs are costs incurred by the applicant prior to the start date of the period of performance of the federal award. OJP does not typically approve pre-agreement costs; an applicant must request and obtain the prior written approval of OJP for all such costs. All such costs incurred prior to award and prior to approval of the costs are incurred at the sole risk of the applicant. (Generally, no applicant should incur project costs before submitting an application requesting federal funding for those costs.) Should there be extenuating circumstances that make it appropriate for OJP to consider approving pre-agreement costs, the applicant may contact the point of contact listed on the title page of this solicitation for the requirements concerning written requests for approval. If approved in advance by OJP, award funds may be used for pre-agreement costs, consistent with the recipient’s approved budget and applicable cost principles. See the section on Costs Requiring Prior Approval in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide for more information. Limitation on Use of Award Funds for Employee Compensation; Waiver With respect to any award of more than $250,000 made under this solicitation, 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 percent of the maximum annual salary payable to a member of the Federal Government’s Senior Executive Service (SES) at an agency with a Certified SES Performance Appraisal System for that year.5 The 2016 salary table for SES employees is available on the Office of Personnel Management website. Note: A recipient may compensate an employee at a greater rate, provided the amount in excess of this compensation limitation is paid with non-federal funds. (Any such additional compensation will not be considered matching funds where match requirements apply.) For employees who charge only a portion of their time to an award, the allowable amount to be charged is equal to the percentage of time worked times the maximum salary limitation. 5 OJP does not apply this limitation on the use of award funds to the nonprofit organizations listed at Appendix VIII to 2 C.F.R. Part 200. 10 BJA-2017-11200 The Assistant Attorney General for OJP 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 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 every applicant that proposes to use award funds for any conference-, meeting-, or training-related activity (or similar event) to review carefully—before submitting an application—the OJP and DOJ policy and guidance on approval, planning, and reporting of such events, available at www.ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm. OJP policy and guidance (1) encourage minimization of conference, meeting, and training costs; (2) require prior written approval (which may affect project timelines) of most conference-, meeting-, and training- costs for cooperative agreement recipients, as well as some conference-, meeting-, and training- costs for grant recipients; and (3) set cost limits, which include a general prohibition of all food and beverage costs. Costs Associated with Language Assistance (if applicable) If an applicant proposes a program or activity that would deliver services or benefits to individuals, the costs of taking reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to those services or benefits for individuals with limited English proficiency may be allowable. Reasonable steps to provide meaningful access to services or benefits may include interpretation or translation services where appropriate. For additional information, see the "Civil Rights Compliance" section under “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2016 Awards” in the OJP Funding Resource Center. C. Eligibility Information For eligibility information, see title page. For information on cost sharing or match requirements, see Section B. Federal Award Information. D. Application and Submission Information What an Application Should Include This section describes in detail what an application should include. An applicant should anticipate that if it fails to submit an application that contains all of the specified elements, it may negatively affect the review of its application; and, should a decision be made to make an 11 BJA-2017-11200 award, it may result in the inclusion of award conditions that preclude the recipient from accessing or using award funds until the recipient satisfies the conditions and OJP makes the funds available. Moreover, an applicant should anticipate that an application that OJP determines is nonresponsive to the scope of the solicitation, or that OJP determines does not include the application elements that BJA has designated to be critical, will neither proceed to peer review, nor receive further consideration. For this solicitation, BJA has designated the following application elements as critical: Program Narrative, Budget Detail Worksheet, and Budget Narrative. Applicants may combine the Budget Narrative and the Budget Detail Worksheet in one document. However, if an applicant submits only one budget document, it must contain both narrative and detail information. Please review the “Note on File Names and File Types” under How to Apply to be sure applications are submitted in permitted formats. OJP strongly recommends that applicants use appropriately descriptive file names (e.g., “Program Narrative,” “Budget Detail Worksheet and Budget Narrative,” “Timelines,” “Memoranda of Understanding,” “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 pre- applications, applications, and related information. Grants.gov and the OJP Grants Management System (GMS) take information from the applicant’s profile to populate the fields on this form. When selecting "type of applicant," if the applicant is a for-profit entity, select "For-Profit Organization" or "Small Business" (as applicable). To avoid processing delays, applicants must include an accurate legal name on their SF- 424. Current OJP award recipients, when completing the field for “Legal Name” should use the same legal name that appears on the prior year award document which is also the legal name stored in OJP’s financial system. On the SF-424, enter the Legal Name in box 5 and Employer Identification Number (EIN) in box 6 exactly as it appears on the prior year award document. Applicants with current awards must ensure that their GMS profile is current. If it isn't they should submit a Grant Adjustment Notice updating the information on their GMS profile prior to applying under this solicitation. New applicants should enter the Official Legal Name and address of the applicant entity in box 5 and the EIN in box 6 of the SF-424. Applicants must attach official legal documents to their applications (e.g., articles of incorporation, 501C3, etc.) to confirm the legal name, address, and EIN entered into the SF-424. Intergovernmental Review: This funding opportunity (program) is not subject to Executive Order 12372. (In completing the SF-424, applicants are to make the appropriate selection in response to question 19 to indicate that the “Program is not covered by E.O. 12372.”) 2. Project Abstract Applications should include a high-quality project abstract that summarizes the proposed project in 400 words or less. Project abstracts should be— • Written for a general public audience. • Submitted as a separate attachment with “Project Abstract” as part of its file name. 12 BJA-2017-11200 • 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. All project abstracts should follow the detailed template available at ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/ProjectAbstractT emplate.pdf. Permission to Share Project Abstract with the Public: It is unlikely that OJP will be able to fund all applications submitted under this solicitation, but it may have the opportunity to share information with the public regarding unfunded applications, for example, through a listing on a web page available to the public. The intent of this public posting would be to allow other possible funders to become aware of such applications. In the project abstract template, each applicant is asked to indicate whether it gives OJP permission to share the applicant's project abstract (including contact information for individuals) with the public. Granting (or failing to grant) this permission will not affect OJP’s funding decisions. Moreover, if the application is not funded, providing permission will not ensure that OJP will share the abstract information, nor will it assure funding from any other source. Note: OJP may choose not to list a project that otherwise would have been included in a listing of unfunded applications, should the abstract fail to meet the format and content requirements noted above and outlined in the project abstract template. 3. Program Narrative The program narrative must respond to the solicitation and the Selection Criteria (1–4) in the order given. The program narrative must be double-spaced, using a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman is preferred) with 1-inch margins, and must not exceed 15 pages. Please number pages “1 of 15,” “2 of 15,” etc. If the program narrative fails to comply with these length-related restrictions, BJA may consider such noncompliance in peer review and in final award decisions. The following sections should be included as part of the program narrative6: a. Statement of the Problem b. Project Design and Implementation c. Capabilities and Competencies d. Plan for Measuring Program Success to Inform Plans for Sustainment e. Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures OJP will require each successful applicant to submit specific performance measures data as part of its reporting under the award (see “General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements” in Section F. Federal Award Administration Information). The performance measures correlate to the goals, objectives, and deliverables identified under "Goals, Objective, and Deliverables" in Section A. Program Description. 6 For information on subawards (including the details on proposed subawards that should be included in the application), see "Budget and Associated Documentation" under Section D. Application and Submission Information. 13 BJA-2017-11200 The application should describe the applicant's plan for collection of all of the performance measures data listed in the table below under “Data Recipient Provides,” should it receive funding. Objective Catalog ID Performance Measure(s) Data Grantee Provides Support the development, implementation, and sustainment of comprehensive, evidence- based, community-oriented crime strategies in targeted neighborhoods through training and technical assistance 410 581 Percentage of sites with approved comprehensive strategies to include vision, theory of action, goals, outcome measures and evidence of broad resident, stakeholder and funder buy- in Percentage of sites with approved comprehensive strategies as components of neighborhood revitalization plans Number of Smart Prosecution sites Number of Smart Prosecution sites with approved comprehensive Smart Prosecution strategies to include vision, theory of action, goals, outcome measures and evidence of broad resident, stakeholder and funder buy-in Number of sites with approved comprehensive Smart Prosecution strategies as components of neighborhood revitalization plans 228 239 235 215 246 246 Number of participants who attend the training Percentage of participants who successfully completed the training Percentage of participants who rated the training as satisfactory or better Percentage of participants trained in and subsequently demonstrating performance improvement Percentage of participants trained who reported they will implement one or more policies or practices Percentage of participants trained who implemented one or more policies or practices 6 months after they were trained For current reporting period, the number of participants who: • Attended the training • Completed training • Completed an evaluation at the conclusion of the training • Completed an evaluation and rated it as satisfactory or better • Completed a pre- and post-test • Completed the post-test with an improved score over their pre-test • Completed an evaluation and reported that they would make changes in their policies or practices due to training • Implemented changes in policy or practice 6 months after they were trained 527 11 Number of onsite visits completed Percentage of agencies that implemented one or more recommendations During the current reporting period, the number of: • Onsite visits completed with Smart Prosecution grantees • Reports submitted to Smart Prosecution grantees after onsite visits • Follow-ups with Smart Prosecution grantees completed 6 months after onsite visit • Smart Prosecution grantees that implemented a new BJA-2017-11200 14 147 493 215 Number of conferences or advisory/focus groups held Percentage of conferences or forums evaluated as satisfactory or better Percentage of participants trained in and subsequently demonstrating performance improvement practice or policy 6 months after the onsite visit During the current reporting period, the number of: • Conferences or advisory/focus groups held • Individuals who attended an Smart Prosecution conference(s) • Conference attendees who completed an evaluation • Attendees who rated the conference as satisfactory or better • Conference attendees who completed a pre- and post-test • Conference attendees with an improved score over their pre- test Increase knowledge of SMART PROSECUTION grantees and the criminal justice community through the development and dissemination of educational materials 54 144 145 Percent of deliverables that meet expectations Number of publications developed Number of publications disseminated Number of deliverables (e.g., Smart Prosecution website, online newsletter, webinars, TTA plans, quarterly progress reports, website resources) Number of deliverables that meet expectation Number of unique educational materials (bulletins, presentations, brochures/pamphlets, newsletters, websites, etc.) developed Number of educational materials disseminated to the field Note on Project Evaluations An applicant that proposes to use funds awarded through this solicitation to conduct project evaluations should be aware that certain project evaluations (such as systematic investigations designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge) may constitute “research” for purposes of applicable DOJ human subjects protection regulations. However, project evaluations that are intended only to generate internal improvements to a program or service, or are conducted only to meet OJP’s performance measure data reporting requirements likely do not constitute “research.” Each applicant should provide sufficient information for OJP to determine whether the particular project it proposes would either intentionally or unintentionally collect and/or use information in such a way that it meets the DOJ regulatory definition of research. Research, for the purposes of human subjects protections for OJP-funded programs, is defined as, “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge” 28 C.F.R. § 46.102(d). For additional information on determining whether a proposed activity would constitute research for purposes of human subjects protection, applicants should consult the decision tree in the “Research and the protection of human subjects” section of the “Requirements related to 15 BJA-2017-11200 Research” web page of the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2016," available through the OJP Funding Resource Center. Every prospective applicant whose application may propose a research or statistical component also should review the “Data Privacy and Confidentiality Requirements” section on that web page. 4. Budget and Associated Documentation a. Budget Detail Worksheet A sample Budget Detail Worksheet can be found at http://ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/BudgetDetailWorksheet.pdf. An applicant that submit its budget in a different format should include the budget categories listed in the sample budget worksheet. The Budget Detail Worksheet should break out costs by year. For questions pertaining to the budget and examples of allowable and unallowable costs, see the Financial Guide at http://ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/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). An applicant should demonstrate in its Budget Narrative how it will maximize cost effectiveness of award expenditures. Budget narratives should generally describe cost effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the project. For example, a budget narrative should detail why planned in-person meetings are necessary, or how technology and collaboration with outside organizations could be used to reduce costs, without compromising quality. The narrative should be mathematically sound and correspond clearly with the information and figures provided in the Budget Detail Worksheet. The narrative should explain how the applicant estimated and calculated all costs, and how those costs are necessary to the completion of the proposed project. The narrative may include tables for clarification purposes but need not be in a spreadsheet format. As with the Budget Detail Worksheet, the Budget Narrative should describe costs by year. c. Information on Proposed Subawards (if any), as well as on Proposed Procurement Contracts (if any) Applicants for OJP awards typically may propose to make "subawards." Applicants also may propose to enter into procurement "contracts" under the award. Whether—for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements—a particular agreement between a recipient and a third party will be considered a "subaward" or instead considered a procurement "contract" under the award is determined by federal rules and applicable OJP guidance. It is an important distinction, in part because the federal administrative rules and requirements that apply to "subawards" and to procurement "contracts" under awards differ markedly. In general, the central question is the relationship between what the third-party will do under its agreement with the recipient and what the recipient has committed (to OJP) to 16 BJA-2017-11200 do under its award to further a public purpose (e.g., services the recipient will provide, products it will develop or modify, research or evaluation it will conduct). If a third party will provide some of the services the recipient has committed (to OJP) to provide, will develop or modify all or part of a product the recipient has committed (to OJP) to develop or modify, or will conduct part of the research or evaluation the recipient has committed (to OJP) to conduct, OJP will consider the agreement with the third party a subaward for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements. This will be true even if the recipient, for internal or other non-federal purposes, labels or treats its agreement as a procurement, a contract, or a procurement contract. Neither the title nor the structure of an agreement determines whether the agreement -- for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements -- is a “subaward” or is instead a procurement “contract” under an award. Additional guidance on the circumstances under which (for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements) an agreement constitutes a subaward as opposed to a procurement contract under an award, is available (along with other resources) on the OJP Part 200 Uniform Requirements web page. 1. Information on proposed subawards A recipient of an OJP award may not make subawards ("subgrants") unless the recipient has specific federal authorization to do so. Unless an applicable statute or DOJ regulation specifically authorizes (or requires) subawards, a recipient must have authorization from OJP before it may make a subaward. A particular subaward may be authorized by OJP because the recipient included a sufficiently-detailed description and justification of the proposed subaward in the application as approved by OJP. If, however, a particular subaward is not authorized by federal statute or regulation, and is not sufficiently described and justified in the application as approved by OJP, the recipient will be required, post-award, to request and obtain written authorization from OJP before it may make the subaward. If an applicant proposes to make one or more subawards to carry out the federal award and program, the applicant should-- (1) identify (if known) the proposed subrecipient(s), (2) describe in detail what each subrecipient will do to carry out the federal award and federal program, and (3) provide a justification for the subaward(s), with details on pertinent matters such as special qualifications and areas of expertise. Pertinent information on subawards should appear not only in the Program Narrative, but also in the Budget Detail Worksheet and budget narrative. 2. Information on proposed procurement contracts (with specific justification for proposed noncompetitive contracts over $150,000) Unlike a recipient contemplating a subaward, a recipient of an OJP award generally does not need specific prior federal authorization to enter into an agreement that -- for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements -- is considered a procurement contract, provided that (1) the recipient uses its own documented procurement procedures and (2) those procedures conform to applicable federal law, including the Procurement Standards of the (DOJ) Part 200 Uniform Requirements (as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.317 - 200.326). The Budget Detail Worksheet and budget narrative should identify proposed procurement contracts. (As discussed above, subawards must be identified and described separately from procurement contracts.) 17 BJA-2017-11200 The Procurement Standards in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, however, reflect a general expectation that agreements that (for purposes of federal grants administrative requirements) constitute procurement “contracts” under awards will be entered into on the basis of full and open competition. If a proposed procurement contract would exceed the simplified acquisition threshold -- currently, $150,000 -- a recipient of an OJP award may not proceed without competition unless and until the recipient receives specific advance authorization from OJP to use a non-competitive approach for the procurement. An applicant that (at the time of its application) intends -- without competition -- to enter into a procurement “contract” that would exceed $150,000 should include a detailed justification that explains to OJP why, in the particular circumstances, it is appropriate to proceed without competition. Various considerations that may be pertinent to the justification are outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide. d. Pre-Agreement Cost Approvals For information on pre-agreement costs, see Section B. Federal Award Information. 5. Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) Indirect costs may be charged to an award only if: (a) The recipient has a current (that is, unexpired), federally-approved indirect cost rate; or (b) The recipient is eligible to use, and elects to use, the “de minimis” indirect cost rate described in the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, as set out at 2 C.F.R. 200.414(f). An applicant with a current (that is, unexpired) federally-approved indirect cost rate is to attach a copy of the indirect cost rate agreement to the application. An applicant that does not have a current federally-approved rate may request one through its cognizant federal agency, which will review all documentation and approve a rate for the applicant entity, or, if the applicant’s accounting system permits, applicants may propose to allocate costs in the direct cost categories. For assistance with identifying the appropriate cognizant federal agency for indirect costs, please contact the OCFO Customer Service Center at 1-800-458-0786 or at ask.ocfo@usdoj.gov. If DOJ is the cognizant federal agency, applicants may obtain information needed to submit an indirect cost rate proposal at http://www.ojp.gov/funding/Apply/Resources/IndirectCosts.pdf. Certain OJP recipients have the option of electing to use the “de minimis” indirect cost rate. An applicant that is eligible to use the “de minimis” rate that wishes to use the "de minimis" rate should attach written documentation to the application that advises OJP of both-- (1) the applicant’s eligibility to use the “de minimis” rate, and (2) its election to do so. If an eligible applicant elects the “de minimis” rate, costs must be consistently charged as either indirect or direct costs, but may not be double charged or inconsistently charged as both. The "de minimis" rate may no longer be used once an approved federally-negotiated indirect cost rate is in place. (No entity that ever has had a federally-approved negotiated indirect cost rate is eligible to use the "de minimis" rate.) 18 BJA-2017-11200 6. Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (including applicant disclosure of high-risk status) Every applicant (other than an individual applying in his/her personal capacity) is to download, complete, and submit the OJP Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire, as part of its application. Among other things, the form requires each applicant to disclose whether it currently is designated “high risk” by a federal grant-making agency outside of DOJ. For purposes of this disclosure, high risk includes any status under which a federal awarding agency provides additional oversight due to the applicant’s past performance, or other programmatic or financial concerns with the applicant. If an applicant is designated high risk by another federal awarding agency, the applicant must provide the following information: • The federal awarding agency that currently designates the applicant high risk • The date the applicant was designated high risk • The high-risk point of contact at that federal awarding agency (name, phone number, and email address) • The reasons for the high-risk status, as set out by the federal awarding agency OJP seeks this information to help ensure appropriate federal oversight of OJP awards. An applicant that is considered “high-risk” by another federal awarding agency is not automatically disqualified from receiving an OJP award. OJP may, however, consider the information in award decisions, and may impose additional OJP oversight of any award under this solicitation (including through the conditions that accompany the award document). 7. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Each applicant must complete and submit this information. An applicant that expends any funds for lobbying activities is to provide all of the information requested on the form Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL). An applicant that does not expend any funds for lobbying activities is to enter “N/A” in the text boxes for item 10 (“a. Name and Address of Lobbying Registrant” and “b. Individuals Performing Services”). 8. Additional Attachments a. Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications Each applicant is to disclose whether it has (or is proposed as a subrecipient under) any pending applications for federally-funded grants or cooperative agreements that (1) include requests for funding to support the same project being proposed in the application under this solicitation, and (2) would cover any identical cost items outlined in the budget submitted to OJP as part of the application under this solicitation. The applicant is to disclose applications made directly to federal awarding agencies, and also applications for subawards of federal funds (e.g., applications to State agencies that will subaward (“subgrant”) federal funds). OJP seeks this information to help avoid any inappropriate duplication of funding. Leveraging multiple funding sources in a complementary manner to implement comprehensive programs or projects is encouraged and is not seen as inappropriate duplication. 19 BJA-2017-11200 Each applicant that has one or more pending applications as described above is to provide the following information about pending applications submitted within the last 12 months: • The federal or state funding agency • The solicitation name/project name • The point of contact information at the applicable federal or State funding agency SAMPLE Each applicant should include the table as a separate attachment to its application. The file should be named “Disclosure of Pending Applications.” The applicant Legal Name on the application must match the entity named on the disclosure of pending applications statement. Any applicant that does not have any pending applications as described above is to submit, as a separate attachment, a statement to this effect: “[Applicant Name on SF- 424] does not have (and is not proposed as a subrecipient under) any pending applications submitted within the last 12 months for federally-funded grants or cooperative agreements (or for subawards under federal grants or cooperative agreements) that request funding to support the same project being proposed in this application to OJP and that would cover any identical cost items outlined in the budget submitted as part of in this application.” b. Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity If an application proposes research (including research and development) and/or evaluation, the applicant must demonstrate research/evaluation independence and integrity, including appropriate safeguards, before it may receive award funds. The applicant must demonstrate independence and integrity regarding both this proposed research and/or evaluation, and any current or prior related projects. Each application should include an attachment that addresses both i. and ii. below. i. For purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to document research and evaluation independence and integrity by including one of the following two items: a. A specific assurance that the applicant has reviewed its application to identify any actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (including through review of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co-principal investigators, and any subrecipients), and that the applicant has identified no such conflicts of interest – whether personal or financial or organizational (including on the part of the applicant entity or on the part of staff, investigators, or subrecipients) – that could affect the independence or 20 Federal or State Funding Agency Solicitation Name/Project Name Name/Phone/Email 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 BJA-2017-11200 integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, and reporting of the research. OR b. A specific description of actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest that the applicant has identified – including through review of pertinent information on the principal investigator, any co-principal investigators, and any subrecipients – that could affect the independence or integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research. These conflicts may be personal (e.g., on the part of investigators or other staff), financial, or organizational (related to the applicant or any subrecipient entity). Some examples of potential investigator (or other personal) conflict situations are those in which an investigator would be in a position to evaluate a spouse’s work product (actual conflict), or an investigator would be in a position to evaluate the work of a former or current colleague (potential apparent conflict). With regard to potential organizational conflicts of interest, as one example, generally an organization would not be given an award to evaluate a project, if that organization had itself provided substantial prior technical assistance to that specific project or a location implementing the project (whether funded by OJP or other sources), because the organization in such an instance might appear to be evaluating the effectiveness of its own prior work. The key is whether a reasonable person understanding all of the facts would be able to have confidence that the results of any research or evaluation project are objective and reliable. Any outside personal or financial interest that casts doubt on that objectivity and reliability of an evaluation or research product is a problem and must be disclosed. ii. In addition, for purposes of this solicitation, each applicant is to address possible mitigation of research integrity concerns by including, at a minimum, one of the following two items: a. If an applicant reasonably believes that no actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) exist, then the applicant should provide a brief narrative explanation of how and why it reached that conclusion. The applicant also is to include an explanation of the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put in place, to identify and prevent (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed. OR b. If the applicant has identified actual or potential apparent conflicts of interest (personal, financial, or organizational) that could affect the independence and integrity of the research, including the design, conduct, or reporting of the research, the applicant must is to provide a specific and robust mitigation plan to address each of those conflicts. At a minimum, the applicant is 21 BJA-2017-11200 expected to explain the specific processes and procedures that the applicant has in place, or will put in place, to identify and eliminate (or, at the very least, mitigate) any such conflicts of interest pertinent to the funded project during the period of performance. Documentation that may be helpful in this regard may include organizational codes of ethics/conduct and policies regarding organizational, personal, and financial conflicts of interest. There is no guarantee that the plan, if any, will be accepted as proposed. OJP will assess research and evaluation independence and integrity based on considerations such as the adequacy of the applicant’s efforts to identify factors that could affect the objectivity or integrity of the proposed staff and/or the applicant entity (and any subrecipients) in carrying out the research, development, or evaluation activity; and the adequacy of the applicant’s existing or proposed remedies to control any such factors. c. Disclosure of Process Related to Executive Compensation An applicant that is a nonprofit organization may be required to make certain disclosures relating to the processes it uses to determine the compensation of its officers, directors, trustees, and key employees. Under certain circumstances, a nonprofit organization that provides unreasonably high compensation to certain persons may subject both the organization’s managers and those who receive the compensation to additional federal taxes. A rebuttable presumption of the reasonableness of a nonprofit organization’s compensation arrangements, however, may be available if the nonprofit organization satisfied certain rules set out in Internal Revenue Service regulations with regard to its compensation decisions. Each applicant nonprofit organization must state at the time of its application (in the "OJP Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire" mentioned earlier) whether or not the applicant entity believes (or asserts) that it currently satisfies the requirements of 26 C.F.R. 53.4958-6 (which relate to establishing or invoking a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness of compensation of certain individuals and entities). A nonprofit organization that states in the questionnaire that it believes (or asserts) that it has satisfied the requirements of 26 C.F.R. 53.4958-6 must then disclose, in an attachment to its application (to be titled "Disclosure of Process related to Executive Compensation"), the process used by the applicant nonprofit organization to determine the compensation of its officers, directors, trustees, and key employees (together, "covered persons"). At a minimum, the disclosure must describe in pertinent detail: (1) the composition of the body that reviews and approves compensation arrangements for covered persons; (2) the methods and practices used by the applicant nonprofit organization to ensure that no individual with a conflict of interest participates as a member of the body that reviews and approves a compensation arrangement for a covered person; (3) the appropriate data as to comparability of compensation that is obtained in advance and relied upon by the body that reviews and approves compensation arrangements for covered persons; and (4) the written or electronic records that the applicant organization maintains as concurrent documentation of the decisions with 22 BJA-2017-11200 respect to compensation of covered persons made by the body that reviews and approves such compensation arrangements, including records of deliberations and of the basis for decisions. For purposes of the required disclosure, the following terms and phrases have the meanings set out by the Internal Revenue Service for use in connection with 26 C.F.R. 53.4958-6: officers, directors, trustees, key employees, compensation, conflict of interest, appropriate data as to comparability, adequate documentation, and concurrent documentation. Applicant nonprofit organizations should note that following receipt of an appropriate request, OJP may be authorized or required by law to make information submitted to satisfy this requirement available for public inspection. Also, a recipient may be required to make a prompt supplemental disclosure after the award in certain circumstances (e.g., changes in the way the organization determines compensation). How to Apply Applicants must register in, and submit applications through Grants.gov, a primary source to find federal funding opportunities and apply for funding. Find complete instructions on how to register and submit an application at www.Grants.gov. Applicants that experience technical difficulties during this process should call the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline at 800–518– 4726 or 606–545–5035, which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, except on federal holidays. Registering with Grants.gov is a one-time process; however, processing delays may occur, and it can take several weeks for first-time registrants to receive confirmation of registration and a user password. OJP encourages applicants to register several weeks before the application submission deadline. In addition, OJP urges applicants to submit applications at least 72 hours prior to the application due date, in order to allow time for the applicant to receive validation messages or rejection notifications from Grants.gov, and to correct in a timely fashion any problems that may have caused a rejection notification. OJP strongly encourages all prospective applicants to sign up for Grants.gov email notifications regarding this solicitation. If this solicitation is cancelled or modified, individuals who sign up with Grants.gov for updates will be automatically notified. Browser Information: Grants.gov was built to be compatible with Internet Explorer. For technical assistance with Google Chrome, or another browser, contact Grants.gov Customer Support. Note on Attachments. Grants.gov has two categories of files for attachments: “mandatory” and “optional.” OJP receives all files attached in both categories. Please ensure that all required documents are attached in either Grants.gov category. 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). 23 BJA-2017-11200 Characters Special Characters Upper case (A – Z) Parenthesis ( ) Curly braces { } Square brackets [ ] Lower case (a – z) Ampersand (&) Tilde (~) Exclamation point (!) Underscore (__) Comma ( , ) Semicolon ( ; ) Apostrophe ( ‘ ) Hyphen ( - ) At sign (@) Number sign (#) Dollar sign ($) Space Percent sign (%) Plus sign (+) Equal sign (=) Period (.) When using the ampersand (&) in XML, applicants must use the “&” 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: • Every applicant entity must comply with all applicable System for Award Management (SAM) and unique entity identifier (currently, a Data Universal Numbering System ["DUNS"] number) requirements. If an applicant entity has not fully complied with applicable SAM and unique identifier requirements by the time OJP makes award decisions, OJP may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive an award and may use that determination as a basis for making the award to a different applicant. • An individual who wishes to apply in his/her personal capacity should search Grants.gov for funding opportunities for which individuals are eligible to apply. Use the Funding Opportunity Number (FON) to register. (An applicant applying as an individual must comply with all applicable Grants.gov individual registration requirements.) • Complete the registration form at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/IndCPRegister to create a username and password for Grants.gov. (An applicant applying as an individual should complete all steps except 1, 2 and 4.) 1. Acquire a unique entity identifier (“DUNS” number). In general, the Office of Management and Budget requires every applicant for a federal award (other than an individual) to include a "unique entity identifier" in each application, including an application for a supplemental award. Currently, a DUNS number is the required unique entity identifier. A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit identification number provided by the commercial company Dun and Bradstreet. This unique entity identifier is used for tracking purposes, and to validate address and point of contact information for applicants, recipients, and subrecipients. It will be used throughout the life cycle of an OJP award. Obtaining a DUNS number is a free, one-time activity. Call Dun and Bradstreet at 866–705–5711 to obtain a 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 24 BJA-2017-11200 their SAM registration annually to maintain an active status. SAM registration and renewal can take as long as 10 business days to complete. An application cannot be successfully submitted in Grants.gov until Grants.gov receives the SAM registration information. Once the SAM registration/renewal is complete, the information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take 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. An applicant entity’s "unique entity identifier" (DUNS number) must be used to complete this step. For more information about the registration process for organizations and other entities, go to www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html. Individuals registering with Grants.gov should go to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/individual- registration.html. 4. Acquire confirmation for the AOR from the E-Business Point of Contact (E-Biz POC). The E-Biz POC at the applicant organization must log into Grants.gov to confirm the applicant organization’s AOR. The E-Biz POC will need the Marketing Partner Identification Number (MPIN) password obtained when registering with SAM to complete this step. Note that an organization can have more than one AOR. 5. Search for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov. Use the following identifying information when searching for the funding opportunity on Grants.gov. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for this solicitation is 16.825, titled “Smart Prosecution Initiative,” and the funding opportunity number is BJA-2017-11200. 6. Submit a valid application consistent with this solicitation by following the directions in Grants.gov. Within 24–48 hours after submitting the electronic application, the applicant should receive two notifications from Grants.gov. The first will confirm the receipt of the application and the second will state whether the application has been successfully 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. All applications are due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on January 26, 2017. Click here for further details on DUNS, SAM, and Grants.gov registration steps and timeframes. Note: Application Versions If an applicant submits multiple versions of the same application, OJP will review only the most recent system-validated version submitted. See Note on File Names and File Types under How to Apply. 25 BJA-2017-11200 Experiencing Unforeseen Grants.gov Technical Issues An applicant that experiences unforeseen Grants.gov technical issues beyond its control that prevent it from submitting its application by the deadline may contact the Grants.gov Customer Support Hotline or the SAM Help Desk (Federal Service Desk) to report the technical issue and receive a tracking number. The applicant may email NCJRS identified in the Contact Information section on the title page within 24 hours after the application deadline to request approval to submit its application after the deadline. The applicant's email must describe the technical difficulties, and must include a timeline of the applicant’s submission efforts, the complete grant application, the applicant’s DUNS number, and any Grants.gov Help Desk or SAM tracking number(s). Note: OJP does not automatically approve requests to submit a late application. After OJP reviews the applicant's request, and contacts the Grants.gov or SAM Help Desks to verify the reported technical issues, OJP will inform the applicant whether the request to submit a late application has been approved or denied. If OJP determines that the untimely application submission was due to the applicant's failure to follow all required procedures, OJP will deny the applicant’s request to submit its application. The following conditions are generally insufficient to justify late submissions: • Failure to register in SAM or Grants.gov in sufficient time. (SAM registration and renewal can take as long as 10 business days to complete. The information transfer from SAM to Grants.gov can take up to 48 hours.) • Failure to follow Grants.gov instructions on how to register and apply as posted on its website. • Failure to follow each instruction in the OJP solicitation. • 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 Resource Center web page. E. Application Review Information Review Criteria Applications that meet basic minimum requirements will be evaluated by peer reviewers using the following review criteria. 1. Statement of the Problem (10 percent) Provide thorough understanding of data-driven and evidence-based crime reduction strategies and its relevance to contemporary crime problems. Describe generally both successes and challenges to fostering research and prosecution practitioner partnerships. Describe the role of crime and data analysis, action research, or analytical capacity in implementing a Smart Prosecution project, and the challenges prosecutorial agencies face in planning, implementing, and sustaining evidence-based crime reduction strategies and organizational changes required to support such strategies. Describe generally the need for training and technical assistance among local jurisdictions in an effort to achieve results as described in this grant announcement. 26 BJA-2017-11200 2. Project Design and Implementation (35 percent) Provide a comprehensive plan for transferring information and evidence-based practices to members of the SMART PROSECUTION community, including the goals, objectives, and deliverables envisioned as the TTA program for existing and future SMART PROSECUTION grantees. Describe project objectives that are linked to meaningful and measurable outcomes consistent with crime prevention and the delivery of quality police services. Include a comprehensive timeline that identifies milestones, numerically listed deliverables, and who is responsible for each activity. Identify strategies for designing and implementing the deliverables (see pages 7–8). Describe how the training and technical assistance will encompass data-driven and evidence-based practices or will be based upon research knowledge and/or data. Describe how the applicant will identify and assess training and technical assistance needs for individual grantee sites, establish tailored TTA plans for each SMART PROSECUTION site, and deliver those services. Explain how the applicant will work with prosecutorial agencies and their research partners to promote and sustain the use and integration of data-driven and evidenced-based decision making department-wide. Identify methods to promote the lessons learned from the SMART PROSECUTION grantees, including the intervention components and successes. 3. Capabilities and Competencies (35 percent) Describe the organization’s ability to provide national, proactive, comprehensive, user- friendly TTA by developing protocols for the delivery, tracking, assessment, and follow-up of these TTA services. Describe the expertise of the applicant, and any subject matter experts, as well as assistance to the SMART PROSECUTION sites’ researcher-practitioner teams in implementing data-driven, research-based assessment and planning processes. Describe the organization’s expertise in delivering and implementing TTA on evidence-based crime reduction strategies; engaging in action research on criminal justice questions; evaluating crime prevention interventions; and serving as a resource on data-driven and evidence- based practices, intelligence, crime strategy units, alternatives to incarceration, violence reduction, etc. to practitioners and the prosecution community. Provide examples of the organization’s experience in using TTA strategies that include developing tools and resources, using distance learning, peer-to-peer consultations, and onsite and offsite technical assistance. List the consultants or partners with whom the organization plans to work to deliver TTA services. For each consultant or partner include a letter of support. Describe the management structure and outline the organization’s ability to conduct the individual activities through the organization’s and staff’s experience, and recruit and partner with individuals and other organizations with the expertise to enhance the organization’s and staff’s experience in developing and providing TTA. Include position descriptions for key positions. 4. Plan for Collecting the Data Required for this Solicitation’s Performance Measures (10 percent) Describe the process for measuring project performance, including meeting timelines and deliverables, and obtaining input and feedback from customers and stakeholders. Identify who will collect the data, who is responsible for performance measurement, how the data will be stored, how any personally identifiable information (PII) will be protected, and how the information will be used to guide the program. Describe the process to accurately report implementation findings. 27 BJA-2017-11200 5. Budget (10 percent) Provide a proposed budget that is complete, cost effective, and allowable (e.g., reasonable, allocable, and necessary for project activities). The budget should include significant monies dedicated to provision of subject matter experts and to support peer-to-peer learning opportunities. Budget narratives should demonstrate generally how applicants will maximize cost effectiveness of grant expenditures. Budget narratives should demonstrate cost effectiveness in relation to potential alternatives and the goals of the project.7 Review Process OJP is committed to ensuring a fair and open process for awarding grants. BJA reviews the application to make sure that the information presented is reasonable, understandable, measurable, and achievable, as well as consistent with the solicitation. Peer reviewers will review the applications submitted under this solicitation that meet basic minimum requirements. For purposes of assessing whether an application meets basic minimum requirements and should proceed to further consideration, OJP screens applications for compliance with those requirements. Although specific requirements may vary, the following are common requirements applicable to all solicitations for funding under OJP programs: • The application must be submitted by an eligible type of applicant. • The application must request funding within programmatic funding constraints (if applicable). • The application must be responsive to the scope of the solicitation. • The application must include all items designated as “critical elements.” • The applicant must not be identified in SAM as excluded from receiving federal awards. For a list of critical elements, see What an Application Should Include under Section D. Application and Submission Information. Peer review panels will evaluate, score, and rate applications that meet basic minimum requirements. BJA may use internal peer reviewers, external peer reviewers, or a combination, to assess applications on technical merit using the solicitation’s review criteria. An external peer reviewer is an expert in the subject matter of a given solicitation who is not a current DOJ employee. An internal reviewer is a current DOJ employee who is well-versed or has expertise in the subject matter of this solicitation. Peer reviewers’ ratings and any resulting recommendations are advisory only, although reviewer views are considered carefully. Other important considerations for OJP include underserved populations, geographic diversity, strategic priorities, and available funding, as well as the extent to which the budget detail worksheet and budget narrative accurately explain project costs that are reasonable, necessary, and otherwise allowable under federal law and applicable federal cost principles. Pursuant to the Part 200 Uniform Requirements, before award decisions are made, OJP also reviews information related to the degree of risk posed by applicants. Among other things to help assess whether an applicant that has one or more prior federal awards has a satisfactory record with respect to performance, integrity, and business ethics, OJP checks whether the applicant is listed in SAM as excluded from receiving a federal award. If OJP anticipates that an award will exceed $150,000 in federal funds, OJP also must review and consider any 7 Generally speaking, a reasonable cost is a cost that, in its nature or amount, does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the costs. 28 BJA-2017-11200 information about the applicant that appears in the non-public segment of the integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System; "FAPIIS"). Important note on FAPIIS: An applicant, at its option, may review and comment on any information about itself that currently appears in FAPIIS and was entered by a federal awarding agency. OJP will consider any such comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in FAPIIS, in its assessment of the risk posed by applicants. The evaluation of risks goes beyond information in SAM, however. OJP itself has in place a framework for evaluating risks posed by applicants for competitive awards. OJP takes into account information pertinent to matters such as -- 1. Applicant financial stability and fiscal integrity 2. Quality of the management systems of the applicant, and the applicant’s ability to meet prescribed management standards, including those outlined in the DOJ Grants Financial Guide 3. Applicant's history of performance under OJP and other DOJ awards (including compliance with reporting requirements and award conditions), as well as awards from other federal agencies 4. Reports and findings from audits of the applicant, including audits under the Part 200 Uniform Requirements 5. Applicant's ability to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, and to effectively implement other award requirements Absent explicit statutory authorization or written delegation of authority to the contrary, all final award decisions will be made by the Assistant Attorney General, who may take into account not only peer review ratings and BJA recommendations, but also other factors as indicated in this section. F. Federal Award Administration Information Federal Award Notices Award notifications will be made by September 30, 2017. OJP sends award notifications by email through GMS to the individuals listed in the application as the point of contact and the authorizing official (E-Biz POC and AOR). The email notification includes detailed instructions on how to access and view the award documents, and steps to take in GMS to start the award acceptance process. GMS automatically issues the notifications at 9:00 p.m. eastern time on the award date. For each successful applicant, an individual with the necessary authority to bind the applicant will be required to log in; execute a set of legal certifications and a set of legal assurances; designate a financial point of contact; thoroughly review the award, including all award conditions; and sign and accept the award. The award acceptance process requires physical signature of the award document by the authorized representative and the scanning of the fully- executed award document to OJP. 29 BJA-2017-11200 Administrative, National Policy, and other Legal Requirements If selected for funding, in addition to implementing the funded project consistent with the OJP- approved application, the recipient must comply with all award conditions, as well as all applicable requirements of federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders (including applicable requirements referred to in the assurances and certifications executed in connection with award acceptance). OJP strongly encourages prospective applicants to review information on post-award legal requirements and common OJP award conditions prior to submitting an application. Applicants should consult the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2016 Awards,” available in the OJP Funding Resource Center. In addition, applicants should examine the following two legal documents, as each successful applicant must execute both documents before it may receive any award funds. • Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements • Standard Assurances Applicants may view these documents in the Apply section of the OJP Funding Resource Center. The web pages accessible through the “Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2016 Awards” are intended to give applicants for OJP awards a general overview of important statutes, regulations, and award conditions that apply to many (or in some cases, all) OJP grants and cooperative agreements awarded in FY 2017. Individual OJP awards typically also will include additional award conditions. Those additional conditions may relate to the particular statute or program, or solicitation under which the award is made; to the substance of the funded application; to the recipient's performance under other federal awards; to the recipient's legal status (e.g., as a for-profit entity); or to other pertinent considerations. As stated above, BJA expects that any award under this solicitation to be a cooperative agreement. A cooperative agreement will include a condition in the award document that sets out the “substantial federal involvement” in carrying out the award and program. Generally speaking, under cooperative agreements with OJP, responsibility for the day-to-day conduct of the funded project rests with the recipient. OJP, however, may have substantial involvement in matters such as coordination efforts and site selection, as well as review and approval of work plans, research designs, data collection instruments, and major project-generated materials. In addition, OJP often indicates in the award condition that it may redirect the project if necessary. In addition to a condition that sets out the “substantial federal involvement” in the award, cooperative agreements awarded by OJP include a condition that requires specific reporting in connection with conferences, meetings, retreats, seminars, symposia, training activities, or similar events funded under the award. General Information about Post-Federal Award Reporting Requirements In addition to the deliverables described in Section A. Program Description, any recipient of an award under this solicitation will be required to submit the following reports and data. 30 BJA-2017-11200 Required reports. Recipients typically must submit quarterly financial reports, semi-annual progress reports, final financial and progress reports, and, if applicable, an annual audit report in accordance with the Part 200 Uniform Requirements or specific award conditions. Future awards and fund drawdowns may be withheld if reports are delinquent. (In appropriate cases, OJP may require additional reports.) Awards that exceed $500,000 will include an additional condition that, under specific circumstances, will require the recipient to report (to FAPIIS) information on civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings connected with (or connected to the performance of) either the OJP award or any other grant, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the federal government. Additional information on this reporting requirement appears in the text of the award condition posted on the OJP website at http://ojp.gov/funding/FAPIIS.htm. Data on performance measures. In addition to required reports, an award recipient also must provide data that measure the results of the work done under the award. To demonstrate program progress and success, as well as to assist DOJ in fulfilling its responsibilities under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), Public Law 103-62, and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010, Public Law 111–352, OJP will require any recipient, post award, to provide the data listed as “Data Recipient Provides” in the performance measures table in Section D. Application and Submission Information, under "Program Narrative," so that OJP can calculate values for this solicitation's performance measures. G. Federal Awarding Agency Contact(s) For contact information, see title page. For contact information for Grants.gov, see title page. H. Other Information Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552 and 5 U.S.C. 552a) All applications submitted to OJP (including all attachments to applications) are subject to the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to the Privacy Act. By law, DOJ may withhold information that is responsive to a request pursuant to FOIA if DOJ determines that the responsive information either is protected under the Privacy Act or falls within the scope of one of nine statutory exemptions under FOIA. DOJ cannot agree in advance of a request pursuant to FOIA not to release some or all portions of an application. In its review of records that are responsive to a FOIA request, OJP will withhold information in those records that plainly falls within the scope of the Privacy Act or one of the statutory exemptions under FOIA. (Some examples include certain types of information in budgets, and names and contact information for project staff other than certain key personnel.) In appropriate circumstances, OJP will request the views of the applicant/recipient that submitted a responsive document. For example, if OJP receives a request pursuant to FOIA for an application submitted by a nonprofit or for-profit organization or an institution of higher education, or for an application that 31 BJA-2017-11200 involves research, OJP typically will contact the applicant/recipient that submitted the application and ask it to identify -- quite precisely -- any particular information in the application that applicant/recipient believes falls under a FOIA exemption, the specific exemption it believes applies, and why. After considering the submission by the applicant/recipient, OJP makes an independent assessment regarding withholding information. OJP generally follows a similar process for requests pursuant to FOIA for applications that may contain law-enforcement sensitive information. Provide Feedback to OJP To assist OJP in improving its application and award processes, 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 email 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 email 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 email your resume to ojppeerreview@lmsolas.com. The OJP Solicitation Feedback email account will not forward your resume. (Do not send your résumé to the OJP Solicitation Feedback email account.) Note: Neither you nor anyone else from your organization can be a peer reviewer in a competition in which you or your organization have submitted an application. BJA-2017-11200 32 Application Checklist FY 2017 Smart Prosecution Initiative Training and Technical Assistance Program 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 24) _____ Acquire or renew registration with SAM (see page 25) To Register with Grants.gov: _____ Acquire AOR and Grants.gov username/password (see page 25) _____ Acquire AOR confirmation from the E-Biz POC (see page 25) To Find Funding Opportunity: _____ Search for the Funding Opportunity on Grants.gov (see page 25) _____ Download Funding Opportunity and Application Package _____ Sign up for Grants.gov email notifications (optional) (see page 23) _____ Read Important Notice: Applying for Grants in Grants.gov _____ Read OJP policy and guidance on conference approval, planning, and reporting available at ojp.gov/financialguide/DOJ/PostawardRequirements/chapter3.10a.htm (see page 11) After application submission, receive Grants.gov email notifications that: _____ (1) application has been received, _____ (2) application has either been successfully validated or rejected with errors (see page 25) If no Grants.gov receipt, and validation or error notifications are received: _____ Contact the NCJRS Response Center regarding experiencing technical difficulties (see page 2) General Requirements: _____ Review the "Overview of Legal Requirements Generally Applicable to OJP Grants and Cooperative Agreements - FY 2016 Awards" in the OJP Funding Resource Center. Scope Requirement: _____ The federal amount requested is within the allowable limit(s) of $1,000,000. Eligibility Requirement: Eligible applicants are limited to any national nonprofit organization, for-profit (commercial) organization (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), or institution of higher learning (including tribal institutions of higher education) that have expertise and experience in managing training and technical assistance for multifaceted place-based, community-oriented, problem-solving justice programs that improve outcomes in distressed communities. What an Application Should Include: _____ Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) (see page 12) _____ Project Abstract (see page 12) _____ *Program Narrative (see page 13) _____ *Budget Detail Worksheet (see page 16) _____ *Budget Narrative (see page 16) BJA-2017-11200 33 _____ Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable) (see page 18) _____ Financial Management and System of Internal Controls Questionnaire (including high risk) if applicable) (see page 19) _____ Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) (see page 19) _____ Additional Attachments _____ Applicant Disclosure of Pending Applications (see page 19) _____ Research and Evaluation Independence and Integrity (see page 20) _____ Disclosure of Process related to Executive Compensation (see page 22) _____ Request and Justification for Employee Compensation Waiver (if applicable) (see page 10) * These elements are the basic minimum requirements for applications. Applications that do not include these elements shall neither proceed to peer review nor receive further consideration by BJA. BJA-2017-11200 34