[Federal Register: October 3, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 57555-57602]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03oc03-150]
[[Page 57555]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
State Justice Institute
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant Guideline; Notice
[[Page 57556]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE
Grant Guideline
AGENCY: State Justice Institute.
ACTION: Proposed grant Guideline.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Guideline sets forth the administrative, programmatic,
and financial requirements attendant to Fiscal Year 2004 State Justice
Institute grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts.
DATES: The Institute invites public comment on the Guideline until
November 3, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed to the State Justice Institute,
1650 King St. (Suite 600), Alexandria, VA 22314, or e-mailed to kschwartz@statejustice.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David I. Tevelin, Executive Director,
or Kathy Schwartz, Deputy Director, State Justice Institute, 1650 King
St. (Suite 600), Alexandria, VA 22314, (703) 684-6100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the State Justice Institute Act
of 1984, 42 U.S.C. 10701, et seq., as amended, the Institute is
authorized to award grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts to
State and local courts, nonprofit organizations, and others for the
purpose of improving the quality of justice in the State courts of the
United States.
Types of Grants Available and Funding Schedules
SJI proposes to offer five types of grants in FY 2004: Project
Grants, Technical Assistance (TA) Grants, Judicial Branch Education
Technical Assistance (JBE TA) grants, Continuation Grants, and
Scholarships.
Project Grants. Project Grants are awarded to support innovative
education, research, demonstration, and technical assistance projects
that can improve the administration of justice in State courts
nationwide. As provided in section V.C. of the Guideline, Project
Grants may ordinarily not exceed $150,000 a year; however, grants in
excess of $100,000 are likely to be rare, and awarded only to support
projects likely to have a significant national impact.
SJI also awards ``think piece'' Project Grants to support the
development of essays of publishable quality that explore emerging
issues that could result in significant changes in court processes or
judicial administration. ``Think pieces'' are limited to no more than
$10,000. See section II.B.
Special Interest Categories. Project Grants, including ``think
piece'' grants, would be awarded only for projects that fall within one
of the Guideline's five Special Interest categories: Access to the
Courts, Application of Technology in the Courts, Children and Families
in Court, Judicial Branch Education, and the Relationship Between State
and Federal Courts. These are the same categories included in last
year's Guideline; however, specific topics of interest within each
category have been changed.
The deadline for submitting a Project Grant application is February
13, 2004. The Board of Directors will meet in early May 2004 to approve
grant awards. See section VI.A. for Project Grant application
procedures.
Technical Assistance Grants. Section II.D. reserves up to $200,000
for Technical Assistance Grants. Under this program, a State or local
court may receive a grant of up to $30,000 to engage outside experts to
provide technical assistance to diagnose, develop, and implement a
response to a jurisdiction's problems.
Letters of application for a Technical Assistance Grant may be
submitted at any time. Applicants submitting letters by September 26,
2003 will be notified of the Board's decision by December 5, 2003.
Those submitting letters between September 27, 2003 and January 9, 2004
will be notified by April 2, 2004; those submitting letters between
January 10 and February 27, 2004 will be notified by June 11, 2004;
those submitting letters between February 28 and June 4, 2004 will be
notified by August 27, 2004; and those submitting letters between June
5 and September 24, 2004 will be notified of the Board's decision by
December 10, 2004. See section VI.D. for Technical Assistance Grant
application procedures.
Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants. Up to
$150,000 would be allocated for grants under the JBE TA grant program
this year. Grants of up to $20,000 would be available to: (1) Enable a
State or local court to adapt and deliver an education program that was
previously developed and evaluated under an SJI project grant (i.e.,
curriculum adaptation); and/or (2) support expert consultation in
planning, developing, and administering State judicial branch education
programs.
The services available through the expanded program could include
consultant assistance in maintaining judicial branch education
programming during the current budget crisis, or development of
improved methods for evaluating judicial branch education programs.
Letters requesting JBE TA Grants may be submitted at any time. The
grant cycles for JBE TA Grants are the same as the grant cycles for TA
Grants:
Applicants submitting letters by September 26, 2003 will be
notified of the Board's decision by December 5, 2003. Those submitting
letters between September 27, 2003 and January 9, 2004 will be notified
by April 2, 2004; those submitting letters between January 10 and
February 27, 2004 will be notified by June 11, 2004; those submitting
letters between February 28 and June 4, 2004 will be notified by August
27, 2004; and those submitting letters between June 5 and September 24,
2004 will be notified of the Board's decision by December 10, 2004. See
section VI.E. for JBE TA Grant application procedures.
Scholarships. The Guideline allocates up to $150,000 of FY 2004
funds for scholarships to enable judges and court managers to attend
out-of-State education and training programs.
Scholarships for eligible applicants are approved largely on a
``first come, first served'' basis, although the Institute may approve
or disapprove scholarship requests in order to achieve appropriate
balances on the basis of geography, program provider, and type of court
or applicant (e.g., trial judge, appellate judge, trial court
administrator). Scholarships will be approved only for programs that
either (1) address topics included in the Guideline's Special Interest
categories (section II.A.); (2) enhance the skills of judges and court
managers; or (3) are part of a graduate degree program for judges or
court personnel.
Applicants interested in obtaining a scholarship for a program
beginning between January 1 and March 31, 2004 must submit their
applications and documents between October 6 and December 1, 2003.
Applicants who wish to attend programs beginning between April 1 and
June 30, 2004 must submit their applications and documents between
January 5 and March 1, 2004. For programs beginning between July 1 and
September 30, 2004, the applications and documents must be submitted
between April 5 and May 31, 2004. For programs beginning between
October 1 and December 31, 2004, the applications and documents must be
submitted between July 6 and August 30, 2004. For programs beginning
between January 1 and March 31, 2005, the applications and documents
must be submitted between October 4 and November 29, 2004. See section
VI.F. for Scholarship application procedures.
Continuation Grants. Continuation Grants (see sections III.D.,
V.B.2., and VI.C.) are intended to enhance the specific program or
service begun
[[Page 57557]]
during the initial project grant period. The Guideline establishes a
firm limit for Continuation Grants of 20% of the total amount projected
to be available for all Project Grants in FY 2004. Grantees should
accordingly be aware that the award of a grant to support a project
does not constitute a commitment to provide continuation funding. Under
the Proposed Guideline, no grant awarded in FY 2004 would be continued
for more than five years.
An applicant for a Continuation Grant must submit a letter
notifying the Institute of its intent to seek such funding no later
than 120 days before the end of the current grant period. The Institute
will then notify the applicant of the deadline for its Continuation
Grant application.
Matching Requirements
With the exception of JBE TA grantees, grantees that can
demonstrate a financial hardship, and Scholarship recipients, the
Guideline proposes that all grantees must provide match, including cash
match, for any Institute grant. The matching requirements are
summarized below:
State and local units of government. The Guideline would require
these grantees to provide matching support equal to 50% of a new SJI-
funded project. For example, if a State court system receives a
$100,000 grant from the Institute, it would be required to provide a
$50,000 match. A State or local unit of government would have to
provide at least 20% of the required match for a new grant ($10,000 in
the example) in the form of cash rather than in-kind support (e.g., the
value of staff time contributed to the project).
All other grantees. The Guideline would require all other grantees
to contribute a match of 25% to a new SJI-funded project. For example,
if a non-profit organization receives a $100,000 grant from SJI, it
would be required to provide a $25,000 match. A non-profit would have
to provide at least 10% of the required match for a new grant ($2,500
in the example) in the form of cash.
The amount and nature of unrequired match contributed by applicants
would continue to be factors the Board of Directors considers in making
grant decisions. Like last year, applicants may request a waiver of the
match requirement, the cash match requirement, or both. See section
VIII.A.8.c.
Continuation Grants. Under section VIII.A.8., all grantees would be
required to assume a greater share of project support over time. State
and local units of government would be required to provide match
equaling at least 50% of the amount provided by SJI in the first year
of the project, 60% in the second year, 75% in the third year, 90% in
the fourth year, and 100% in the fifth year. For example, if SJI awards
a State court $100,000 for the first year of a grant, the court would
be required to provide $50,000 in match. If the second-year grant is
also $100,000, the court would be required to provide $60,000 in match.
A court that wished to limit its second-year contribution to $50,000
could ask SJI for a reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the
60% requirement.
All other grantees would be required to provide match equaling at
least 25% of the amount provided by SJI in the first year of the
project, 30% in the second year, 37.5% in the third year, 45% in the
fourth year, and 50% in the fifth year. For example, if SJI awards a
non-profit organization $100,000 for the first year of a grant, the
organization would be required to provide $25,000 in match. If the
second year grant is also $100,000, the court would be required to
provide $30,000 in match. An organization that wished to limit its
second-year contribution to $25,000 could ask SJI for a reduced amount,
i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 30% requirement.
Absent extraordinary circumstances, no SJI grant awarded in FY 2004
would continue for more than five years.
Solutions Project
In FY 2003, the Institute allocated approximately $800,000 to
support the Solutions Project, a process that will draw on State and
local court initiatives to identify and exchange promising solutions to
the most critical problems facing the courts, and define a national
agenda to improve the quality of justice in State courts nationwide.
Nearly $400,000 of the allocation was awarded in amounts up to
$20,000 to 20 States. A list of the States receiving those grants and a
description of their projects may be found on the Institute's web site
(http://www.statejustice.org). The remaining FY 2003 money, and an additional
$400,000 of FY 2004 money, is reserved for the National Solutions
Project that will be carried out under a cooperative agreement among
SJI, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), and the Center for
Effective Public Policy (CEPP). The Board of Directors has approved
planning grants to both organizations and anticipates making the next
awards to carry out the national aspects of the Project at its meeting
in early November.
Issues Highlighted for Public Comment
The Proposed Guideline would make four significant changes from
last year's grant program. Three of those changes would reduce the
allocations reserved for the Institute's three small grant programs:
JBE TA Grants, Technical Assistance Grants, and Scholarships. In order
to make the most money possible available for Project Grants, which are
designed to have nationwide impact, the Institute would reduce the pool
of money available for JBE TA Grants from $300,000 to $150,000; the
pool available for Technical Assistance Grants from $300,000 to
$200,000; and the amount available for scholarships from $200,000 to
$150,000. The reduced amounts to be reserved for each program in FY
2004 still exceed the amounts awarded under each program in FY 2003.
In addition, the Proposed Guideline would not require recipients of
JBE TA Grants to provide cash match. The Board of Directors recognizes
that the serious budget problems affecting State courts nationwide have
sharply reduced the amount of State funds available for judicial branch
education. The Board hopes that, by eliminating the cash match
requirement for JBE TA grants, more States will seek these grants next
fiscal year.
Recommendations to Grantwriters
Recommendations to Grantwriters may be found in Appendix A.
The State Justice Institute proposes the following Grant Guideline
for FY 2004:
Table of Contents
I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute
II. Scope of the Program
III. Definitions
IV. Eligibility for Award
V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of Awards
VI. Applications
VII. Application Review Procedures
VIII. Compliance Requirements
IX. Financial Requirements
X. Grant Adjustments
Appendix A Recommendations to Grant Writers
Appendix B Answers to Grantees' Frequently Asked Questions
Appendix C SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts
Appendix D Illustrative List of Technical Assistance Grants
Appendix E Illustrative List of Model Curricula
Appendix F Project Grant Application Forms (Forms A, B, C, C1, D,
and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities)
Appendix G Line-Item Budget Form (Form E)
Appendix H Scholarship Application Forms (Forms S1 and S2)
[[Page 57558]]
I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute
The Institute was established by Public Law 98-620 to improve the
administration of justice in the State courts of the United States.
Incorporated in the State of Virginia as a private, nonprofit
corporation, the Institute is charged, by statute, with the
responsibility to:
[sbull] Direct a national program of financial assistance designed
to assure that each citizen of the United States is provided ready
access to a fair and effective system of justice;
[sbull] Foster coordination and cooperation with the Federal
judiciary;
[sbull] Promote recognition of the importance of the separation of
powers doctrine to an independent judiciary; and
[sbull] Encourage education for judges and support personnel of
State court systems through national and State organizations, including
universities.
To accomplish these broad objectives, the Institute is authorized
to provide funds to State courts, national organizations which support
and are supported by State courts, national judicial education
organizations, and other organizations that can assist in improving the
quality of justice in the State courts.
The Institute is supervised by an 11-member Board of Directors
appointed by the President, with the consent of the Senate. The Board
is statutorily composed of six judges, a State court administrator, and
four members of the public, no more than two of whom can be of the same
political party.
Through the award of grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements,
the Institute is authorized to perform the following activities:
A. Support research, demonstrations, special projects, technical
assistance, and training to improve the administration of justice in
the State courts;
B. Provide for the preparation, publication, and dissemination of
information regarding State judicial systems;
C. Participate in joint projects with Federal agencies and other
private grantors;
D. Evaluate or provide for the evaluation of programs and projects
funded by the Institute to determine their impact upon the quality of
criminal, civil, and juvenile justice and the extent to which they have
contributed to improving the quality of justice in the State courts;
E. Encourage and assist in furthering judicial education;
F. Encourage, assist, and serve in a consulting capacity to State
and local justice system agencies in the development, maintenance, and
coordination of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice programs and
services; and
G. Be responsible for the certification of national programs that
are intended to aid and improve State judicial systems.
II. Scope of the Program
As set forth in section I., the Institute is authorized to fund
projects addressing a broad range of program areas. However, during FY
2004, the Institute will consider applications for funding support that
address only the topics included in the following five program
categories designated by the Board as being of special interest. Funds
will not be made available for the ordinary, routine operation of court
systems or programs in any of these areas.
A. Special Interest Program Categories
The Institute is interested in funding both innovative programs and
programs of proven merit that can be replicated in other jurisdictions.
The Institute is especially interested in funding projects that:
[sbull] Formulate new procedures and techniques, or creatively
enhance existing procedures and techniques;
[sbull] Address aspects of the State judicial systems that are in
special need of serious attention;
[sbull] Have national significance by developing products,
services, and techniques that may be used in other States; and
[sbull] Create and disseminate products that effectively transfer
the information and ideas developed to relevant audiences in State and
local judicial systems, or provide technical assistance to facilitate
the adaptation of effective programs and procedures in other State and
local jurisdictions.
A project will be identified as a Special Interest project if it
meets the four criteria set forth above and it falls within the scope
of the Special Interest program categories designated below.
The Board has designated the areas set forth below as Special
Interest program categories. The order of listing does not imply any
ordering of priorities among the categories. For a complete list of
projects supported in previous years in each of these categories,
please visit the Institute's Internet homepage at http://www.statejustice.org/
and click on Grants by Category.
1. Access to the Courts
This category includes demonstration, evaluation, research, and
education projects designed to improve the responsiveness of courts to
public concerns regarding the fairness, accessibility, timeliness, and
comprehensibility of the court process.
The Institute is particularly interested in supporting innovative
projects that:
[sbull] Test and evaluate approaches permitting self-represented
litigants to file pleadings, responses, and other forms electronically;
[sbull] Test and evaluate new approaches to enhance public access
to the courts, including demonstrations of innovative collaborative
efforts between courts and community institutions (e.g., bar
associations, legal service agencies, schools, and public libraries) to
enhance access to the courts by people without lawyers (in this regard,
however, Institute funds may not be used to directly or indirectly
support legal representation of individuals in specific cases); and
[sbull] Develop and test a range of strategies, methodologies,
guidelines, and outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of
programs established to assist people without lawyers.
2. Application of Technology in the Courts
This category includes the testing of innovative applications of
technology to improve the operation of court management systems and
judicial practices at both the trial and appellate court levels. The
Institute seeks to support local experiments with promising but
untested applications of technology in the courts that include an
evaluation of the impact of the technology in terms of costs, benefits,
and staff workload, and a training component to assure that staff is
appropriately educated about the purpose and use of the new technology.
In this context, ``untested'' includes novel applications of technology
developed for the private sector that have not previously been applied
in the courts.
The Institute is particularly interested in supporting efforts to
test and evaluate technologies that would:
[sbull] Test and evaluate approaches permitting self-represented
litigants to file pleadings, responses, and other forms electronically;
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the delivery of technology to
rural courts through an Internet-based ``application service provider''
approach;
[sbull] Evaluate approaches for electronically filing pleadings,
briefs,
[[Page 57559]]
and other documents; approaches to integrate electronic filing and
electronic document management; and the impact of electronic court
record systems on case management and court procedures;
[sbull] Test and evaluate the use of Geographic Information System
(GIS) software as a means of examining and improving courts' outreach
to particular segments of the communities they serve;
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the use of expert system
technology to assist judicial decision-making; and
[sbull] Evaluate innovative applications of technology designed to
ensure the safety of all who use and work in the courts.
3. Children and Families in Court
This category includes education, demonstration, evaluation,
technical assistance, and research projects to identify and inform
judges of innovative, effective approaches for handling cases involving
children and families. The Institute is particularly interested in
projects that would:
[sbull] Test and evaluate different approaches to managing and
adjudicating domestic violence cases, including domestic violence
courts; integrated case management information systems; collaborations
among courts, law enforcement agencies, social service agencies,
women's shelters, victims support and advocacy organizations, and
others; and other innovative practices intended to improve the courts'
response to domestic violence.
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate innovative approaches to manage
and coordinate cases and proceedings involving multiple members of the
same family;
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of a ``one
social worker/one family'' or judge-social worker team approach to
handling child abuse and neglect cases;
[sbull] Develop and test innovative protocols, procedures,
educational programs, and other measures to address the service needs
of children exposed to family violence and the methods for mitigating
those effects when issuing protection, custody, visitation, or other
orders;
[sbull] Educate judges about how to interpret and evaluate evidence
presented by psychologists, psychiatrists, and other professionals
appearing in child custody and visitation cases involving domestic
violence between the parents;
[sbull] Develop and test the implementation of a differentiated
case management system for handling child custody disputes;
[sbull] Develop and evaluate educational programs addressing a
collaborative community approach to reducing and preventing domestic
violence for a multidisciplinary audience that includes judges,
prosecutors, defense attorneys, victim advocates, doctors, and social
services providers;
[sbull] Evaluate the impact of court policies and procedures and
collaborative community approaches designed to ensure that juvenile sex
offenders have access to an appropriate array of services; and
[sbull] Create and test educational programs, guidelines, and
monitoring systems to assure that the juvenile justice system meets the
needs of girls and children of color.
Institute funds may not be used to provide operational support to
programs offering direct services or compensation to victims of crimes.
(Applicants interested in obtaining such operational support should
contact the Office for Victims of Crime [OVC], Office of Justice
Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, or the agency in their State that
awards OVC funds to State and local victim assistance and compensation
programs.)
4. Judicial Branch Education
The Institute is interested in supporting projects that will
continue to strengthen and broaden the availability of court education
programs at the State, regional, and national levels. This category is
divided into three subsections: (a) Innovative Educational Programs;
(b) Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Projects; and (c)
Scholarships.
a. Innovative Educational Programs. This category includes support
for the development and pilot-testing of innovative, high-quality
educational programs for trial and appellate judges or court personnel
that address key issues of concern to the nation's courts, or help
local courts or State court systems develop or enhance their capacity
to deliver quality continuing education.
Programs may be designed for presentation at the local, State,
regional, or national level. Ordinarily, court education programs
should be based on an assessment of the needs of the target audience;
include clearly stated learning objectives that delineate the new
knowledge or skills participants will acquire (as opposed to a
description of what will be taught); incorporate adult education
principles and multiple teaching/learning methods; and result in the
development of a curriculum as defined in section III.E.
The Institute is particularly interested in supporting the
development of programs that:
[sbull] Educate judges and court personnel about how to design and
sustain problem-solving courts;
[sbull] Educate State court judges, law clerks, and staff counsel
about capital case law, DNA evidence, and other legal and scientific
issues related to the trial and appeal of capital cases;
[sbull] Educate State court judges and court personnel about
special problems related to the adjudication of capital cases,
including jury voir dire, jury sequestration, sentencing hearings,
court security, and media management; and
[sbull] Develop and test curricula and materials designed to
familiarize judges and court managers with the need for and key
elements of effective assistance programs for people without lawyers,
and the resources required to sustain them.
b. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Projects. The
Board is reserving up to $150,000 to support technical assistance and
on-site consultation in planning, developing, and administering
comprehensive and specialized State judicial branch education programs,
as well as the adaptation of model curricula previously developed with
SJI funds.
The goals of the Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance
Program (JBE TA) in FY 2004 are to:
(1) Provide State and local courts with the opportunity to access
expert strategic assistance to enable them to maintain judicial branch
education programming during the current budget crisis; and
(2) Enable courts to modify a model curriculum, course module, or
conference program developed with SJI funds to meet a particular
State's or local jurisdiction's educational needs; train instructors to
present portions or all of the curriculum; and pilot-test it to
determine its appropriateness, quality, and effectiveness. An
illustrative but non-inclusive list of the curricula that may be
appropriate for adaptation is contained in Appendix E.
Only State or local courts may apply for JBE TA funding.
Application procedures may be found in section VI.E. State and local
courts are not required to contribute cash match to JBE TA grants.
c. Scholarships for Judges and Court Managers. The Institute is
reserving up to $150,000 to support a scholarship program for State
judges and court managers. The purposes of the scholarship program are
to:
[sbull] Enhance the skills, knowledge, and abilities of judges and
court managers;
[sbull] Enable State court judges and court managers to attend out-
of-State
[[Page 57560]]
educational programs sponsored by national and State providers that
they could not otherwise attend because of limited State, local, and
personal budgets; and
[sbull] Provide States, judicial educators, and the Institute with
evaluative information on a range of judicial and court-related
education programs.
Scholarships will be granted to individuals only for the purpose of
attending an out-of-State educational program within the United States.
Application procedures may be found in section VI.F.
5. The Relationship Between State and Federal Courts
This category includes education, research, demonstration, and
evaluation projects designed to facilitate appropriate and effective
communication, cooperation, and coordination between State and Federal
courts.
The Institute is particularly interested in innovative projects
that:
[sbull] Evaluate State and Federal courts' experiences with capital
cases to identify reasons for reversals of trial court convictions,
barriers to timely disposition, and steps that can be taken to minimize
reversals and undue delay;
[sbull] Educate judges about capital case law, DNA evidence, and
judicial administration issues arising from death penalty cases, e.g.,
court security, jury sequestration, and media management;
[sbull] Establish standards for selecting qualified appointed
defense counsel in capital cases, and evaluating different appointment
approaches;
[sbull] Support commissions that involve members of the judiciary
in reviewing and remedying errors that led to wrongful convictions in
death penalty cases;
[sbull] Coordinate and process mass tort cases fairly and
efficiently at the trial and appellate levels;
[sbull] Provide assistance to courts in developing plans to
continue operations in the wake of a catastrophic incident, including
establishing lines of succession; and
[sbull] Develop effective emergency responses to acts of terrorism.
B. ``Think Pieces''
This category addresses the development of essays of publishable
quality directed to the court community. The essays should explore
emerging issues that could result in significant changes in court
process or judicial administration and their implications for the
future for judges, court managers, policy-makers, and the public.
Grants supporting such projects are limited to no more than $10,000.
Applicants should follow the procedures explained in section VI.B. of
this Guideline.
Think piece topics are limited to the five Special Interest
categories listed in section II.A. of this Guideline. In particular,
the Institute is interested in supporting the development of essays on:
[sbull] Issues related to the institutionalization and maintenance
of drug and other problem-solving courts, e.g., maintaining budgets in
fiscally constrained times, finding new sources of money, identifying
and selecting new judges while still maintaining the focus of the court
and enthusiasm for the concept;
[sbull] What the courts have learned from problem-solving
approaches that can be applied throughout the court system to enhance
public trust and confidence; and
[sbull] The advantages, disadvantages, and appropriate use of
anonymous juries.
C. The Solutions Project
The Solutions Project is a process intended to infuse the State
courts with the ability to develop innovative and creative ways to
address the problems they face and provide a mechanism to transfer
these ideas throughout the nation. In addition to providing State
courts with an array of promising solutions to their most pressing
problems, the Solutions Project will generate consensus on projects,
ideas, and programs that merit additional Federal funding support
because of their broad appeal and promise.
In FY 2003, the Institute awarded close to $400,000 to support
Solutions Project grants in 20 States. The grants support events and
activities such as town hall meetings, focus groups, surveys, and other
initiatives designed to (a) collect information about the problems
facing the courts in a particular State, (b) assess the effectiveness
of the solutions the court system has developed to respond to those
problems, and (c) solicit the public's recommendations about other
potential solutions.
The Board of Directors also awarded planning grants to the National
Center for State Courts and the Center for Effective Public Policy to
design the tasks required to carry out the national aspects of the
Project. The Institute has reserved up to $400,000 in FY 03 funds and
up to $400,000 in FY 04 funds to support the national phase of The
Solutions Project. Visit the SJI Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) for
continuing updates on the Project.
D. Technical Assistance Grants
The Board will set aside up to $200,000 to support the provision of
technical assistance to State and local courts. The program is designed
to provide State and local courts with sufficient support to obtain
technical assistance to diagnose a problem, develop a response to that
problem, and implement any needed changes. The Institute will reserve
sufficient funds each quarter to assure the availability of Technical
Assistance Grants throughout the year.
Technical Assistance Grants are limited to no more than $30,000
each, and may cover the cost of obtaining the services of expert
consultants; travel by a team of officials from one court to examine a
practice, program, or facility in another jurisdiction that the
applicant court is interested in replicating; or both. Normally, the
technical assistance must be completed within 12 months after the start
date of the grant.
Only a State or local court may apply for a Technical Assistance
grant. The application procedures may be found in section VI.D.
III. Definitions
The following definitions apply for the purposes of this Guideline:
A. Acknowledgment of SJI Support
The prominent display of the SJI logo on the front cover of a
written product or in the opening frames of a videotape developed with
Institute support, and inclusion of a brief statement on the inside
front cover or title page of the document or the opening frames of the
videotape identifying the grant number. See section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for
the precise wording of the statement.
B. Application
A formal request for an Institute grant. A complete application
consists of: Form A--Application; Form B--Certificate of State Approval
(for applications from local trial or appellate courts or agencies);
Form C--Project Budget/Tabular Format or Form C1--Project Budget/
Spreadsheet Format; Form D--Assurances; Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities; a detailed 25-page description of the need for the project
and all related tasks, including the time frame for completion of each
task, and staffing requirements; and a detailed budget narrative that
provides the basis for all costs. See section VI. for a complete
description of application submission requirements. See appendix F for
the Project Grant application forms.
[[Page 57561]]
C. Close-Out
The process by which the Institute determines that all applicable
administrative and financial actions and all required grant work have
been completed by both the grantee and the Institute.
D. Continuation Grant
A grant lasting no longer than 15 months to permit completion of
activities initiated under an existing Institute grant or enhancement
of the products or services produced during the prior grant period. See
section VI.C. for a complete description of continuation application
requirements.
E. Curriculum
The materials needed to replicate an education or training program
developed with grant funds including, but not limited to: The learning
objectives; the presentation methods; a sample agenda or schedule; an
outline of presentations and relevant instructors' notes; copies of
overhead transparencies or other visual aids; exercises, case studies,
hypotheticals, quizzes, and other materials for involving the
participants; background materials for participants; evaluation forms;
and suggestions for replicating the program, including possible faculty
or the preferred qualifications or experience of those selected as
faculty.
F. Designated Agency or Council
The office or judicial body which is authorized under State law or
by delegation from the State Supreme Court to approve applications for
SJI grant funds and to receive, administer, and be accountable for
those funds.
G. Disclaimer
A brief statement that must be included at the beginning of a
document or in the opening frames of a videotape produced with
Institute support that specifies that the points of view expressed in
the document or tape do not necessarily represent the official position
or policies of the Institute. See section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for the
precise wording of this statement.
H. Grant Adjustment
A change in the design or scope of a project from that described in
the approved application, acknowledged in writing by the Institute. See
section X.A for a list of the types of changes requiring a formal grant
adjustment. Ordinarily, changes requiring a Grant Adjustment (including
budget reallocations between direct cost categories that individually
or cumulatively exceed five percent of the approved original budget)
should be requested at least 30 days in advance of the implementation
of the requested change.
I. Grantee
The organization, entity, or individual to which an award of
Institute funds is made. For a grant based on an application from a
State or local court, grantee refers to the State Supreme Court or its
designee.
J. Human Subjects
Individuals who are participants in an experimental procedure or
who are asked to provide information about themselves, their attitudes,
feelings, opinions, and/or experiences through an interview,
questionnaire, or other data collection technique.
K. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance (JBE TA) Grant
A grant of up to $20,000 awarded to a State or local court to
support expert assistance in designing or delivering judicial branch
education programming, and/or the adaptation of an education program
based on an SJI-supported curriculum that was previously developed and
evaluated under an SJI Project Grant. See section VI.E. for a complete
description of JBE TA Grant application requirements.
L. Match
The portion of project costs not borne by the Institute. Match
includes both in-kind and cash contributions. Cash match is the direct
outlay of funds by the grantee to support the project. Examples of cash
match are the dedication of funds to support a new employee or purchase
new equipment to carry out the project; that portion of the grantee's
Federally approved indirect cost rate that exceeds the Guideline's
limit of permitted charges (75% of salaries and benefits); any other
reduction in the indirect cost rate to be charged to the grant; and the
application of project income (e.g., tuition or the proceeds of sales
of grant products) generated during the grant period to grant costs.
In-kind match consists of contributions of time and/or services of
current staff members, space, supplies, etc., made to the project by
the grantee or others (e.g., advisory board members) working directly
on the project.
Under normal circumstances, allowable match may be incurred only
during the project period. When appropriate, and with the prior written
permission of the Institute, match may be incurred from the date of the
Board of Directors' approval of an award. Match does not include the
time of participants attending an education program.
See section VIII.A.8. for the Institute's matching requirements.
M. Products
Tangible materials resulting from funded projects including, but
not limited to: Curricula; monographs; reports; books; articles;
manuals; handbooks; benchbooks; guidelines; videotapes; audiotapes;
computer software; and CD-ROM disks.
N. Project Grant
An initial grant lasting up to 15 months to support an innovative
education, research, demonstration, or technical assistance project
that can improve the administration of justice in State courts
nationwide. Ordinarily, a project grant may not exceed $150,000 a year;
however, a grant in excess of $100,000 is likely to be rare and awarded
only to support highly promising projects that will have a significant
national impact. See section VI.A. for a complete description of
Project Grant application requirements.
O. Project-Related Income
Interest, royalties, registration and tuition fees, proceeds from
the sale of products, and other earnings generated as a result of an
Institute grant. Registration and tuition fees, and proceeds from the
sale of products generated during the grant period may be counted as
match. For a more complete description of different types of project-
related income, see section IX.G.
P. Scholarship
A grant of up to $1,500 awarded to a judge or court employee to
cover the cost of tuition for and transportation to and from an out-of-
State educational program within the United States. See section VI.F.
for a complete description of scholarship application requirements.
Q. Special Condition
A requirement attached to a grant award that is unique to a
particular project.
R. State Supreme Court
The highest appellate court in a State, or, for the purposes of the
Institute program, a constitutionally or legislatively established
judicial council that acts in place of that court. In States having
more than one court with final appellate authority, State Supreme Court
means that court which also has administrative responsibility for the
State's judicial system. State Supreme
[[Page 57562]]
Court also includes the office of the court or council, if any, it
designates to perform the functions described in this Guideline.
S. Subgrantee
A State or local court which receives Institute funds through the
State Supreme Court.
T. Technical Assistance Grant
A grant, lasting up to 12 months, of up to $30,000 to a State or
local court to support outside expert assistance in diagnosing a
problem and developing and implementing a response to that problem. See
section VI.D. for a complete description of technical assistance grant
application requirements.
IV. Eligibility for Award
The Institute is authorized by Congress to award grants,
cooperative agreements, and contracts to the following entities and
types of organizations:
A. State and local courts and their agencies (42
U.S.C.10705(b)(1)(A)). Each application for funding from a State or
local court must be approved, consistent with State law, by the State's
Supreme Court or its designated agency or council. The latter shall
receive all Institute funds awarded to such courts and be responsible
for assuring proper administration of Institute funds, in accordance
with section IX.C.2. of this Guideline.
B. National nonprofit organizations controlled by, operating in
conjunction with, and serving the judicial branches of State
governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(B)).
C. National nonprofit organizations for the education and training
of judges and support personnel of the judicial branch of State
governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(C)). An applicant is considered a
national education and training applicant under section 10705(b)(1)(C)
if:
1. The principal purpose or activity of the applicant is to provide
education and training to State and local judges and court personnel;
and
2. the applicant demonstrates a record of substantial experience in
the field of judicial education and training.
D. Other eligible grant recipients (42 U.S.C.10705(b)(2)(A)-(D)).
1. Provided that the objectives of the project can be served
better, the Institute is also authorized to make awards to:
a. Nonprofit organizations with expertise in judicial
administration;
b. institutions of higher education;
c. individuals, partnerships, firms, corporations (for-profit
organizations must waive their fees); and
d. private agencies with expertise in judicial administration.
2. The Institute may also make awards to State or local agencies
and institutions other than courts for services that cannot be
adequately provided through nongovernmental arrangements (42 U.S.C.
10705(b)(3)).
E. Inter-agency Agreements. The Institute may enter into inter-
agency agreements with Federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)) and
private funders to support projects consistent with the purposes of the
State Justice Institute Act.
V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of Awards
A. Types of Projects
The Institute supports the following general types of projects:
1. Education and training;
2. research and evaluation;
3. demonstration; and
4. technical assistance.
B. Types of Grants
The Institute supports the following types of grants:
1. Project Grants
See sections II.A. and B., and VI.A. The Institute places no annual
limitations on the overall number of project grant awards or the number
of awards in each Special Interest category.
2. Continuation Grants
See sections III.D. and VI.C. In FY 2004, the Institute is
allocating no more than 20% of available Project Grant funds for
continuation grants.
3. Technical Assistance Grants
See sections II.D. and VI.D. In FY 2004, the Institute is reserving
up to $200,000 for these grants.
4. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants
See sections II.A.4.b., III.K., and VI.E. In FY 2004, the Institute
is reserving up to $150,000 for Judicial Branch Education Technical
Assistance Grants, which includes adaptations of curricula previously
developed with SJI funding.
5. Scholarships
See sections II.A.4.c., III.P., and VI.F. In FY 2004, the Institute
is reserving up to $150,000 for scholarships for judges and court
employees. The Institute will reserve sufficient funds each quarter to
assure the availability of scholarships throughout the year.
C. Maximum Size of Awards
1. Except as specified below, applicants for new Project Grants and
continuation grants may request funding in amounts up to $150,000 for
15 months, although new and continuation awards in excess of $100,000
are likely to be rare and to be made, if at all, only for highly
promising proposals that will have a significant impact nationally.
2. Applicants for Technical Assistance Grants may request funding
in amounts up to $30,000.
3. Applicants for Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance
Grants may request funding in amounts up to $20,000.
4. Applicants for scholarships may request funding in amounts up to
$1,500.
D. Length of Grant Periods
1. Grant periods for all new and continuation projects ordinarily
may not exceed 15 months. Absent extraordinary circumstances, no grant
will continue for more than five years.
2. Grant periods for Technical Assistance Grants and Judicial
Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants ordinarily may not exceed
12 months.
VI. Applications
A. Project Grants
An application for a Project Grant must include an application
form; budget forms (with appropriate documentation); a project abstract
and program narrative; a disclosure of lobbying form, when applicable;
and certain certifications and assurances (see below). See appendix F
for the Project Grant application forms. For a summary of the
application process, visit the Institute's Web site
(http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Project
Grant.
1. Forms
a. Application Form (FORM A). The application form requests basic
information regarding the proposed project, the applicant, and the
total amount of funding requested from the Institute. It also requires
the signature of an individual authorized to certify on behalf of the
applicant that the information contained in the application is true and
complete; that submission of the application has been authorized by the
applicant; and that if funding for the proposed project is approved,
the applicant will comply with the requirements and conditions of the
award, including the assurances set forth in Form D.
b. Certificate of State Approval (FORM B). An application from a
State or local court must include a copy of FORM B signed by the
State's Chief Justice or Chief Judge, the director of the
[[Page 57563]]
designated agency, or the head of the designated council. The signature
denotes that the proposed project has been approved by the State's
highest court or the agency or council it has designated. It denotes
further that if the Institute approved funding for the project, the
court or the specified designee will receive, administer, and be
accountable for the awarded funds.
c. Budget Forms (FORM C or C1). Applicants may submit the proposed
project budget either in the tabular format of FORM C or in the
spreadsheet format of FORM C1. Applicants requesting $100,000 or more
are strongly encouraged to use the spreadsheet format. If the proposed
project period is for more than a year, a separate form should be
submitted for each year or portion of a year for which grant support is
requested, as well as for the total length of the project.
In addition to FORM C or C1, applicants must provide a detailed
budget narrative providing an explanation of the basis for the
estimates in each budget category. (See section VI.A.4. below.)
If funds from other sources are required to conduct the project,
either as match or to support other aspects of the project, the source,
current status of the request, and anticipated decision date must be
provided.
d. Assurances (FORM D). This form lists the statutory, regulatory,
and policy requirements with which recipients of Institute funds must
comply.
e. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. Applicants other than units
of State or local government are required to disclose whether they, or
another entity that is part of the same organization as the applicant,
have advocated a position before Congress on any issue, and to identify
the specific subjects of their lobbying efforts. (See section
VIII.A.7.)
2. Project Abstract
The abstract should highlight the purposes, goals, methods, and
anticipated benefits of the proposed project. It should not exceed 1
single-spaced page on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper.
3. Program Narrative
The program narrative for an application may not exceed 25 double-
spaced pages on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper. Margins must be at least 1
inch, and type size must be at least 12-point and 12 cpi. The pages
should be numbered. This page limit does not include the forms, the
abstract, the budget narrative, and any appendices containing resumes
and letters of cooperation or endorsement. Additional background
material should be attached only if it is essential to impart a clear
understanding of the proposed project. Numerous and lengthy appendices
are strongly discouraged.
The program narrative should address the following topics:
a. Project Objectives. The applicant should include a clear,
concise statement of what the proposed project is intended to
accomplish. In stating the objectives of the project, applicants should
focus on the overall programmatic objective (e.g., to enhance
understanding and skills regarding a specific subject, or to determine
how a certain procedure affects the court and litigants) rather than on
operational objectives (e.g., provide training for 32 judges and court
managers, or review data from 300 cases).
b. Program Areas to be Covered. The applicant should note the
Special Interest category or categories that are addressed by the
proposed project (see section II.A.).
c. Need for the Project. If the project is to be conducted in any
specific location(s), the applicant should discuss the particular needs
of the project site(s) to be addressed by the project and why those
needs are not being met through the use of existing programs,
procedures, services, or other resources.
If the project is not site-specific, the applicant should discuss
the problems that the proposed project would address, and why existing
programs, procedures, services, or other resources cannot adequately
resolve those problems. The discussion should include specific
references to the relevant literature and to the experience in the
field.
d. Tasks, Methods and Evaluation. (1) Tasks and Methods. The
applicant should delineate the tasks to be performed in achieving the
project objectives and the methods to be used for accomplishing each
task. For example:
(a) For research and evaluation projects, the applicant should
include the data sources, data collection strategies, variables to be
examined, and analytic procedures to be used for conducting the
research or evaluation and ensuring the validity and general
applicability of the results. For projects involving human subjects,
the discussion of methods should address the procedures for obtaining
respondents' informed consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and
freedom from risk or harm, and protecting others who are not the
subjects of research but would be affected by the research. If the
potential exists for risk or harm to human subjects, a discussion
should be included that explains the value of the proposed research and
the methods to be used to minimize or eliminate such risk.
(b) For education and training projects, the applicant should
include the adult education techniques to be used in designing and
presenting the program, including the teaching/learning objectives of
the educational design, the teaching methods to be used, and the
opportunities for structured interaction among the participants; how
faculty would be recruited, selected, and trained; the proposed number
and length of the conferences, courses, seminars, or workshops to be
conducted and the estimated number of persons who would attend them;
the materials to be provided and how they would be developed; and the
cost to participants.
(c) For demonstration projects, the applicant should include the
demonstration sites and the reasons they were selected, or if the sites
have not been chosen, how they would be identified and their
cooperation obtained; and how the program or procedures would be
implemented and monitored.
(d) For technical assistance projects, the applicant should explain
the types of assistance that would be provided; the particular issues
and problems for which assistance would be provided; how requests would
be obtained and the type of assistance determined; how suitable
providers would be selected and briefed; how reports would be reviewed;
and the cost to recipients.
(2) Evaluation. Every project must include an evaluation plan to
determine whether the project met its objectives. The evaluation should
be designed to provide an objective and independent assessment of the
effectiveness or usefulness of the training or services provided; the
impact of the procedures, technology, or services tested; or the
validity and applicability of the research conducted. In addition,
where appropriate, the evaluation process should be designed to provide
ongoing or periodic feedback on the effectiveness or utility of the
project in order to promote its continuing improvement. The plan should
present the qualifications of the evaluator(s); describe the criteria
that would be used to evaluate the project's effectiveness in meeting
its objectives; explain how the evaluation would be conducted,
including the specific data collection and analysis techniques to be
used; discuss why this approach would be appropriate; and present a
schedule for completion of the evaluation within the proposed project
period.
[[Page 57564]]
The evaluation plan should be appropriate to the type of project
proposed. For example:
(a) Research. An evaluation approach suited to many research
projects is a review by an advisory panel of the research methodology,
data collection instruments, preliminary analyses, and products as they
are drafted. The panel should be comprised of independent researchers
and practitioners representing the perspectives affected by the
proposed project.
(b) Education and Training. The most valuable approaches to
evaluating educational or training programs reinforce the participants'
learning experience while providing useful feedback on the impact of
the program and possible areas for improvement. One appropriate
evaluation approach is to assess the acquisition of new knowledge,
skills, attitudes, or understanding through participant feedback on the
seminar or training event. Such feedback might include a self-
assessment of what was learned along with the participant's response to
the quality and effectiveness of faculty presentations, the format of
sessions, the value or usefulness of the material presented, and other
relevant factors. Another appropriate approach would be to use an
independent observer who might request both verbal and written
responses from participants in the program. When an education project
involves the development of curricular materials, an advisory panel of
relevant experts can be coupled with a test of the curriculum to obtain
the reactions of participants and faculty as indicated above.
(c) Demonstration. The evaluation plan for a demonstration project
should encompass an assessment of program effectiveness (e.g., how well
did it work?); user satisfaction, if appropriate; the cost-
effectiveness of the program; a process analysis of the program (e.g.,
was the program implemented as designed, and/or did it provide the
services intended to the targeted population?); the impact of the
program (e.g., what effect did the program have on the court, and/or
what benefits resulted from the program?); and the replicability of the
program or components of the program.
(d) Technical Assistance. For technical assistance projects,
applicants should explain how the quality, timeliness, and impact of
the assistance provided would be determined, and develop a mechanism
for feedback from both the users and providers of the technical
assistance.
Evaluation plans involving human subjects should include a
discussion of the procedures for obtaining respondents' informed
consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and freedom from risk or
harm, and protecting others who are not the subjects of the evaluation
but would be affected by it. Other than the provision of
confidentiality to respondents, human subject protection issues
ordinarily are not applicable to participants evaluating an education
program.
e. Project Management. The applicant should present a detailed
management plan, including the starting and completion date for each
task; the time commitments to the project of key staff and their
responsibilities regarding each project task; and the procedures that
would ensure that all tasks are performed on time, within budget, and
at the highest level of quality. In preparing the project time line,
Gantt Chart, or schedule, applicants should make certain that all
project activities, including publication or reproduction of project
products and their initial dissemination, would occur within the
proposed project period. The management plan must also provide for the
submission of Quarterly Progress and Financial Reports within 30 days
after the close of each calendar quarter (i.e., no later than January
30, April 30, July 30, and October 30).
Applicants should be aware that the Institute is unlikely to
approve more than one limited extension of the grant period. Therefore,
the management plan should be as realistic as possible and fully
reflect the time commitments of the proposed project staff and
consultants.
f. Products. The program narrative in the application should
contain a description of the products to be developed (e.g., training
curricula and materials, videotapes, articles, manuals, or handbooks),
including when they would be submitted to the Institute. The budget
should include the cost of producing and disseminating the product to
each in-State SJI library (See appendix C), State chief justice, State
court administrator, and other appropriate judges or court personnel.
(1) Dissemination Plan. The application must explain how and to
whom the products would be disseminated; describe how they would
benefit the State courts, including how they could be used by judges
and court personnel; identify development, production, and
dissemination costs covered by the project budget; and present the
basis on which products and services developed or provided under the
grant would be offered to the courts community and the public at large
(i.e., whether products would be distributed at no cost to recipients,
or if costs are involved, the reason for charging recipients and the
estimated price of the product) (see section VIII.A.11.b.). Ordinarily,
applicants should schedule all product preparation and distribution
activities within the project period.
A copy of each product must be sent to the library established in
each State to collect the materials developed with Institute support.
(A list of these libraries is contained in appendix C.) Applicants
proposing to develop web-based products should provide for sending a
hard-copy document to the SJI-designated libraries and other
appropriate audiences to alert them to the availability of the web site
or electronic product (i.e., a written report with a reference to the
web site).
Fifteen (15) copies of all project products must be submitted to
the Institute, along with an electronic version in .html or .pdf
format.
(2) Types of Products and Press Releases. The type of product to be
prepared depends on the nature of the project. For example, in most
instances, the products of a research, evaluation, or demonstration
project should include an article summarizing the project findings that
is publishable in a journal serving the courts community nationally, an
executive summary that would be disseminated to the project's primary
audience, or both. Applicants proposing to conduct empirical research
or evaluation projects with national import should describe how they
would make their data available for secondary analysis after the grant
period. (See section VIII.A.14.a.).
The curricula and other products developed through education and
training projects should be designed for use outside the classroom so
that they may be used again by the original participants and others in
the course of their duties.
In addition, recipients of project grants must prepare a press
release describing the project and announcing the results, and
distribute the release to a list of national and State judicial branch
organizations. SJI will provide press release guidelines and a list of
recipients to grantees at least 30 days before the end of the grant
period.
(3) Institute Review. Applicants must submit a final draft of all
written grant products to the Institute for review and approval at
least 30 days before the products are submitted for publication or
reproduction. For products in a videotape or CD-ROM format, applicants
must provide for Institute review of the product at the treatment,
script, rough-cut, and final stages of
[[Page 57565]]
development, or their equivalents. No grant funds may be obligated for
publication or reproduction of a final grant product without the
written approval of the Institute. (See section VIII.A.11.e.)
(4) Acknowledgment, Disclaimer, and Logo. Applicants must also
include in all project products a prominent acknowledgment that support
was received from the Institute and a disclaimer paragraph based on the
example provided in section VIII.A.11.a.(2) of the Guideline. The
``SJI'' logo must appear on the front cover of a written product, or in
the opening frames of a video, unless the Institute approves another
placement.
g. Applicant Status. An applicant that is not a State or local
court and has not received a grant from the Institute within the past
three years should state whether it is either a national non-profit
organization controlled by, operating in conjunction with, and serving
the judicial branches of State governments, or a national non-profit
organization for the education and training of State court judges and
support personnel. See section IV. If the applicant is a nonjudicial
unit of Federal, State, or local government, it must explain whether
the proposed services could be adequately provided by non-governmental
entities.
h. Staff Capability. The applicant should include a summary of the
training and experience of the key staff members and consultants that
qualify them for conducting and managing the proposed project. Resumes
of identified staff should be attached to the application. If one or
more key staff members and consultants are not known at the time of the
application, a description of the criteria that would be used to select
persons for these positions should be included. The applicant also
should identify the person who would be responsible for managing and
reporting on the financial aspects of the proposed project.
i. Organizational Capacity. Applicants that have not received a
grant from the Institute within the past three years should include a
statement describing their capacity to administer grant funds,
including the financial systems used to monitor project expenditures
(and income, if any), and a summary of their past experience in
administering grants, as well as any resources or capabilities that
they have that would particularly assist in the successful completion
of the project.
Unless requested otherwise, an applicant that has received a grant
from the Institute within the past three years should describe only the
changes in its organizational capacity, tax status, or financial
capability that may affect its capacity to administer a grant.
If the applicant is a non-profit organization (other than a
university), it must also provide documentation of its 501(c) tax-
exempt status as determined by the Internal Revenue Service and a copy
of a current certified audit report. For purposes of this requirement,
``current'' means no earlier than two years prior to the present
calendar year.
If a current audit report is not available, the Institute will
require the organization to complete a financial capability
questionnaire, which must be signed by a Certified Public Accountant.
Other applicants may be required to provide a current audit report, a
financial capability questionnaire, or both, if specifically requested
to do so by the Institute.
j. Statement of Lobbying Activities. Non-governmental applicants
must submit the Institute's Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form,
which documents whether they, or another entity that is a part of the
same organization as the applicant, have advocated a position before
Congress on any issue, and identifies the specific subjects of their
lobbying efforts. See appendix F.
k. Letters of Cooperation or Support. If the cooperation of courts,
organizations, agencies, or individuals other than the applicant is
required to conduct the project, the applicant should attach written
assurances of cooperation and availability to the application, or send
them under separate cover. To ensure sufficient time to bring them to
the Board's attention, letters of support sent under separate cover
must be received by March 15, 2004.
4. Budget Narrative
The budget narrative should provide the basis for the computation
of all project-related costs. When the proposed project would be
partially supported by grants from other funding sources, applicants
should make clear what costs would be covered by those other grants.
Additional background or schedules may be attached if they are
essential to obtaining a clear understanding of the proposed budget.
Numerous and lengthy appendices are strongly discouraged.
The budget narrative should cover the costs of all components of
the project and clearly identify costs attributable to the project
evaluation. Under OMB grant guidelines incorporated by reference in
this Guideline, grant funds may not be used to purchase alcoholic
beverages.
a. Justification of Personnel Compensation. The applicant should
set forth the percentages of time to be devoted by the individuals who
would staff the proposed project, the annual salary of each of those
persons, and the number of work days per year used for calculating the
percentages of time or daily rates of those individuals. The applicant
should explain any deviations from current rates or established written
organizational policies. If grant funds are requested to pay the salary
and related costs for a current employee of a court or other unit of
government, the applicant should explain why this would not constitute
a supplantation of State or local funds in violation of 42 U.S.C.
10706(d)(1). An acceptable explanation may be that the position to be
filled is a new one established in conjunction with the project or that
the grant funds would support only the portion of the employee's time
that would be dedicated to new or additional duties related to the
project.
b. Fringe Benefit Computation. The applicant should provide a
description of the fringe benefits provided to employees. If
percentages are used, the authority for such use should be presented,
as well as a description of the elements included in the determination
of the percentage rate.
c. Consultant/Contractual Services and Honoraria. The applicant
should describe the tasks each consultant would perform, the estimated
total amount to be paid to each consultant, the basis for compensation
rates (e. g., the number of days multiplied by the daily consultant
rates), and the method for selection. Rates for consultant services
must be set in accordance with section IX.I.2.c. Prior written
Institute approval is required for any consultant rate in excess of
$300 per day; Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more
than $900 per day. Honorarium payments must be justified in the same
manner as consultant payments.
d. Travel. Transportation costs and per diem rates must comply with
the policies of the applicant organization. If the applicant does not
have an established travel policy, then travel rates must be consistent
with those established by the Institute or the Federal Government. (A
copy of the Institute's travel policy is available upon request.) The
budget narrative should include an explanation of the rate used,
including the components of the per diem rate and the basis for the
estimated transportation expenses. The purpose of the travel should
also be included in the narrative.
[[Page 57566]]
e. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase only the
equipment necessary to demonstrate a new technological application in a
court or that is otherwise essential to accomplishing the objectives of
the project. Equipment purchases to support basic court operations
ordinarily will not be approved. The applicant should describe the
equipment to be purchased or leased and explain why the acquisition of
that equipment is essential to accomplish the project's goals and
objectives. The narrative should clearly identify which equipment is to
be leased and which is to be purchased. The method of procurement
should also be described. Purchases of automated data processing
equipment must comply with section IX.I.2.b.
f. Supplies. The applicant should provide a general description of
the supplies necessary to accomplish the goals and objectives of the
grant. In addition, the applicant should provide the basis for the
amount requested for this expenditure category.
g. Construction. Construction expenses are prohibited except for
the limited purposes set forth in section VIII.A.16.b. Any allowable
construction or renovation expense should be described in detail in the
budget narrative.
h. Telephone. Applicants should include anticipated telephone
charges, distinguishing between monthly charges and long distance
charges in the budget narrative. Also, applicants should provide the
basis used to calculate the monthly and long distance estimates.
i. Postage. Anticipated postage costs for project-related mailings,
including distribution of the final product(s), should be described in
the budget narrative. The cost of special mailings, such as for a
survey or for announcing a workshop, should be distinguished from
routine operational mailing costs. The bases for all postage estimates
should be included in the budget narrative.
j. Printing/Photocopying. Anticipated costs for printing or
photocopying project documents, reports, and publications should be
included in the budget narrative, along with the bases used to
calculate these estimates.
k. Indirect Costs. Recoverable indirect costs are limited to no
more than 75% of a grantee's direct personnel costs (salaries plus
fringe benefits). Grantees may apply unrecoverable indirect costs to
meet their required matching contributions, including the required
level of cash match. See sections III.L. and IX.I.4.
Applicants should describe the indirect cost rates applicable to
the grant in detail. If costs often included within an indirect cost
rate are charged directly (e.g., a percentage of the time of senior
managers to supervise project activities), the applicant should specify
that these costs are not included within its approved indirect cost
rate. These rates must be established in accordance with section
IX.I.4. If the applicant has an indirect cost rate or allocation plan
approved by any Federal granting agency, a copy of the approved rate
agreement should be attached to the application.
1. Match. Courts or other units of State or local government (not
including publicly supported institutions of higher education) must
provide a match from private or public sources of not less than 50% of
the total amount of the Institute's award. 42 U.S.C. 10705(d). At least
20% of the required match for a new grant to a court or other unit of
State or local government (other than a Judicial Branch Education
Technical Assistance grant) must be cash. All other grantees (except
scholarship recipients and individuals receiving ``think piece''
grants) must contribute a match of 25% to a new grant; at least 10% of
the required match must be cash.
The applicant should describe the source of the matching
contribution and the nature of the match provided. Any additional cash
and in-kind contributions to the project should be described in this
section of the budget narrative as well. If in-kind match is to be
provided, the applicant should describe how the amount and value of the
time, services, or materials actually contributed would be documented
for audit purposes. Applicants should be aware that the time spent by
participants in education courses does not qualify as in-kind match.
Applicants that do not contemplate making matching contributions
continuously throughout the course of the project or on a task-by-task
basis must provide a schedule within 30 days after the beginning of the
project period indicating at what points during the project period the
matching contributions would be made. (See sections III.L., VIII.A.8.,
and IX.E.1.)
The Institute may waive the match and cash match requirements in
certain circumstances. See section VIII.A.8.c.
5. Submission Requirements
a. Every applicant must submit an original and four copies of the
application package consisting of FORM A; FORM B, if the application is
from a State or local court, or a Disclosure of Lobbying Form, if the
applicant is not a unit of State or local government; the Budget Forms
(either FORM C or C-1); the Application Abstract; the Program
Narrative; the Budget Narrative; and any necessary appendices.
All applications must be sent by first class or overnight mail or
by courier no later than February 13, 2004. A postmark or courier
receipt will constitute evidence of the submission date. Please mark
APPLICATION on the application package envelope and send it to: State
Justice Institute, 1650 King Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.
Receipt of each application will be acknowledged in writing.
Extensions of the deadline for submission of applications will not be
granted without good cause.
b. Applicants submitting more than one application may include
material that would be identical in each application in a cover letter.
This material will be incorporated by reference into each application
and counted against the 25-page limit for the program narrative. A copy
of the cover letter should be attached to each copy of each
application.
B. ``Think Piece'' Applications
1. Purpose and Scope
``Think pieces'' are essays of publishable quality directed to the
court community. They are intended to explore emerging issues that
could result in significant changes in court process or judicial
administration and their implications for the future for judges, court
managers, policy-makers, and the public.
2. Forms
An application for a ``think piece'' must include the same forms
required for a project grant. See A.1. above in this section.
3. Program Narrative
The program narrative should be no longer than necessary, but must
not exceed 8 double-spaced pages on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper. Margins
must be at least 1 inch and type size must be at least 12 point and 12
cpi. The pages should be numbered. The narrative should:
a. Identify the specific Special Interest category into which the
``think piece'' would fall;
b. describe the subject it would address;
c. explain how the essay would advance the current state of the art
or knowledge about the subject;
d. discuss the benefits that would accrue to the State courts
generally as a result of the essay's publication; and
[[Page 57567]]
e. outline plans for the publication of the ``think piece,'' e.g.,
the intended audience, and the types or titles of periodicals or
journals to which it would be submitted.
4. Budget and Budget Narrative
The applicant should provide a complete budget and budget narrative
conforming to the requirements set forth in A.4. above in this section;
however, individuals proposing to develop ``think pieces'' are not
required to provide match.
5. Submission Requirements
The submission requirements set forth in section VI.A.5 apply to
all ``think piece'' applications.
C. Continuation Grant Applications
1. Purpose
Continuation grants are intended to support projects that carry out
the same type of activities carried out under a previous grant. They
are intended to enhance the specific program or service produced or
established during the prior grant period. They may be used, for
example, when a project is divided into two or more sequential phases,
for secondary analysis of data obtained in an Institute-supported
research project, or for more extensive testing of an innovative
technology, procedure, or program developed with SJI grant support.
2. Limitations
The award of an initial grant to support a project does not
constitute a commitment by the Institute to continue funding. For a
project to be considered for continuation funding, the grantee must
have completed all project tasks and met all grant requirements and
conditions in a timely manner, absent extenuating circumstances or
prior Institute approval of changes to the project design. Continuation
grants are not intended to provide support for a project for which the
grantee has underestimated the amount of time or funds needed to
accomplish the project tasks. Absent extraordinary circumstances, no
grant will continue for more than five years.
3. Letters of Intent
A grantee seeking a continuation grant must inform the Institute,
by letter, of its intent to submit an application for such funding as
soon as the need for continued funding becomes apparent but no less
than 120 days before the end of the current grant period.
a. A letter of intent must be no more than 3 single-spaced pages on
8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper and contain a concise but thorough explanation
of the need for continuation; an estimate of the funds to be requested;
and a brief description of anticipated changes in the scope, focus, or
audience of the project.
b. Within 30 days after receiving a letter of intent, Institute
staff will review the proposed activities for the next project period
and inform the grantee of specific issues to be addressed in the
continuation application and the date by which the application must be
submitted.
4. Application Format
An application for a continuation grant must include an application
form, budget forms (with appropriate documentation), a project abstract
conforming to the format set forth in A.2. of this section, a program
narrative, a budget narrative, a Certificate of State Approval--FORM B
(if the applicant is a State or local court), a Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities form (from applicants other than units of State or local
government), and any necessary appendices. See appendix F for the
application forms.
The program narrative should conform to the length and format
requirements set forth in section VI.A.3. However, rather than the
topics listed there, the program narrative of a continuation
application should include:
a. Project Objectives. The applicant should clearly and concisely
state what the continuation project is intended to accomplish.
b. Need for Continuation. The applicant should explain why
continuation of the project is necessary to achieve the goals of the
project, and how the continuation would benefit the participating
courts or the courts community generally, by explaining, for example,
how the original goals and objectives of the project would be
unfulfilled if it were not continued; or how the value of the project
would be enhanced by its continuation.
c. Report of Current Project Activities. The applicant should
discuss the status of all activities conducted during the previous
project period. Applicants should identify any activities that were not
completed, and explain why.
d. Evaluation Findings. The applicant should present the key
findings, impact, or recommendations resulting from the evaluation of
the project, if available, and how they would be addressed during the
proposed continuation. If the findings are not yet available, the
applicant should provide the date by which they would be submitted to
the Institute. Ordinarily, the Board will not consider an application
for continuation funding until the Institute has received the
evaluator's report.
e. Tasks, Methods, Staff, and Grantee Capability. The applicant
should fully describe any changes in the tasks to be performed, the
methods to be used, the products of the project, and how and to whom
those products would be disseminated, as well as any changes in the
assigned staff or the grantee's organizational capacity. Applicants
should include, in addition, the criteria and methods by which the
proposed continuation project would be evaluated.
f. Task Schedule. The applicant should present a detailed task
schedule and timeline for the next project period.
g. Other Sources of Support. The applicant should indicate why
other sources of support would be inadequate, inappropriate, or
unavailable.
5. Budget and Budget Narrative
a. Institute Funds. The applicant should provide a complete budget
and budget narrative conforming to the requirements set forth in
VI.A.4. above. Changes in the funding level requested should be
discussed in terms of corresponding increases or decreases in the scope
of activities or services to be rendered. In addition, the applicant
should estimate the amount of grant funds that would remain unobligated
at the end of the current grant period.
b. Matching Contribution.
i. State and local units of government must provide match equaling
at least 50% of the amount provided by the Institute in the first year
of the project, 60% in the second year, 75% in the third year, 90% in
the fourth year, and 100% in the fifth year.
For example, if the Institute awards a State court $100,000 for the
first year of a grant, the court would be required to provide $50,000
in match. If the second-year grant is also $100,000, the court would be
required to provide $60,000 in match. A State or local unit of
government would have to provide at least 20% of the required match in
the form of cash rather than in-kind support (e.g., the value of staff
time contributed to the project).
ii. All other grantees must provide match equaling at least 25% of
the amount provided by the Institute in the first year of the project,
30% in the second year, 37.5% in the third year, 45% in the fourth
year, and 50% in the fifth year. For example, if the Institute awards a
non-profit organization $100,000 for the first year of a grant, the
organization would be required to provide $25,000 in match. If the
second year grant is also $100,000, the court would be required to
provide $30,000 in
[[Page 57568]]
match. A non-profit organization must provide at least 10% of the
required match in the form of cash.
iii. The Institute may waive the match and cash match requirements
in certain circumstances. See section VIII.A.8.c.
6. References to Previously Submitted Material
A continuation application should not repeat information contained
in a previously approved application or other previously submitted
materials, but should provide specific references to such materials
where appropriate.
7. Submission Requirements
The submission requirements set forth in section VI.A.5., other
than the mailing deadline, apply to continuation applications.
D. Technical Assistance Grants
1. Purpose and Scope
Technical Assistance Grants are awarded to State and local courts
to obtain the assistance of outside experts in diagnosing, developing,
and implementing a response to a particular problem in a jurisdiction.
2. Application Procedures.
For a summary of the application procedures for Technical
Assistance Grants, visit the Institute's Web site
(http://www.statejustice.org) and click On-Line Tutorials, then Technical
Assistance Grant.
In lieu of formal applications, applicants for Technical Assistance
Grants may submit, at any time, an original and three copies of a
detailed letter describing the proposed project. Letters from an
individual trial or appellate court must be signed by the presiding
judge or manager of that court. Letters from the State court system
must be signed by the Chief Justice or State Court Administrator.
3. Application Format
Although there is no prescribed form for the letter nor a minimum
or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the
following information:
a. Need for Funding. What is the critical need facing the court?
How would the proposed technical assistance help the court meet this
critical need? Why cannot State or local resources fully support the
costs of the required consultant services?
b. Project Description. What tasks would the consultant be expected
to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which organization or
individual would be hired to provide the assistance, and how was this
consultant selected? If a consultant has not yet been identified, what
procedures and criteria would be used to select the consultant?
(Applicants are expected to follow their jurisdictions' normal
procedures for procuring consultant services.) What specific tasks
would the consultant(s) and court staff undertake? What is the schedule
for completion of each required task and the entire project? How would
the court oversee the project and provide guidance to the consultant,
and who at the court would be responsible for coordinating all project
tasks and submitting quarterly progress and financial status reports?
If the consultant has been identified, the applicant should provide
a letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in
and availability for the project, as well as the consultant's ability
to complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the
proposed cost. The consultant must agree to submit a detailed written
report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical
assistance.
c. Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be
taken to facilitate implementation of the consultant's recommendations
upon completion of the technical assistance? For example, if the
support or cooperation of specific court officials or committees, other
agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or a court other than the
applicant would be needed to adopt the changes recommended by the
consultant and approved by the court, how would they be involved in the
review of the recommendations and development of the implementation
plan?
d. Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its
Designated Agency or Council. Written concurrence on the need for the
technical assistance must be submitted. This concurrence may be a copy
of SJI Form B (see Appendix F) signed by the Chief Justice of the State
Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from the
State Chief Justice or designee. The concurrence may be submitted with
the applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to consideration
of the application. The concurrence also must specify whether the State
Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account for the grant
funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or a specified
agency or council to receive the funds directly.
4. Budget and Matching State Contribution
A completed Form E, Line-Item Budget Form (see appendix G), and
budget narrative must be included with the letter requesting technical
assistance. The estimated cost of the technical assistance services
should be broken down into the categories listed on the budget form
rather than aggregated under the Consultant/Contractual category.
The budget narrative should provide the basis for all project-
related costs, including the basis for determining the estimated
consultant costs, if compensation of the consultant is required (e.g.,
the number of days per task times the requested daily consultant rate).
Applicants should be aware that consultant rates above $300 per day
must be approved in advance by the Institute, and that no consultant
will be paid more than $900 per day from Institute funds. In addition,
the budget should provide for submission of two copies of the
consultant's final report to the Institute.
As with other awards to State or local courts, match must be
provided in an amount equal to at least 50% of the grant amount
requested, and 20% of the match provided must be cash. The Institute
may waive the match and cash match requirements in certain
circumstances. See section VIII.A.8.c.
Recipients of Technical Assistance Grants do not have to submit an
audit but must maintain appropriate documentation to support
expenditures. (See section VIII.A.3.)
5. Submission Requirements
Letters of application may be submitted at any time; however, all
of the letters received during a calendar quarter will be considered at
one time. Applicants submitting letters by September 26, 2003 will be
notified of the Board's decision by December 5, 2003. Those submitting
letters between September 27, 2003 and January 9, 2004 will be notified
of the Institute's decision by April 2, 2004; those submitting letters
between January 10 and February 27, 2004 will be notified by June 11,
2004; those submitting letters between February 28 and June 4, 2004
will be notified by August 27, 2004; and those submitting letters
between June 5 and September 24, 2004 will be notified by December 10,
2004.
If the support or cooperation of agencies, funding bodies,
organizations, or courts other than the applicant would be needed in
order for the consultant to perform the required tasks, written
assurances of such support or cooperation should accompany the
application letter. Support letters also may be submitted under
separate cover; however, to ensure that there is sufficient time to
bring them to the
[[Page 57569]]
attention of the Board's Technical Assistance Committee, letters sent
under separate cover must be received not less than three weeks prior
to the Board meeting at which the technical assistance requests will be
considered (i.e., by October 15, 2003; and February 12, April 8, July
2, and October 14, 2004).
E. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants
1. Purpose and Scope
Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance (JBE TA) Grants are
awarded to State and local courts to support: (1) The provision of
expert strategic assistance designed to enable them to maintain
judicial branch education programming during the current budget crisis;
and/or (2) replication or modification of a model training program
originally developed with Institute funds. Ordinarily, the Institute
will support the adaptation of a curriculum once (i.e., with one grant)
in a given State.
JBE TA Grants may support consultant assistance in maintaining or
developing systematic or innovative judicial branch educational
programming. The assistance might include expert consultation in
developing strategic plans to ensure the continued provision of
judicial branch education programming despite fiscal constraints;
development of improved methods for assessing the need for, and
evaluating the quality and impact of, court education programs and
their administration by State or local courts; faculty development;
and/or topical program presentations. Such assistance may be tailored
to address the needs of a particular State or local court or specific
categories of court employees throughout a State and, in certain cases,
in a region, if sponsored by a court.
2. Application Procedures
For a summary of the application procedures for Judicial Branch
Education Technical Assistance Grants, visit the Institute's Web site
(http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Judicial
Branch Education Technical Assistance Grant.
In lieu of formal applications, applicants should submit an
original and three photocopies of a detailed letter.
3. Application Format
Although there is no prescribed format for the letter, or a minimum
or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the
following information:
a. For on-site consultant assistance:
(1) Need for Funding. What is the critical judicial branch
educational need facing the court? How would the proposed technical
assistance help the court meet this critical need? Why cannot State or
local resources fully support the costs of the required consultant
services?
(2) Project Description. What tasks would the consultant be
expected to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which
organization or individual would be hired to provide the assistance,
and how was this consultant selected? If a consultant has not yet been
identified, what procedures and criteria would be used to select the
consultant? (Applicants are expected to follow their jurisdictions'
normal procedures for procuring consultant services.) What specific
tasks would the consultant(s) and court staff undertake? What is the
schedule for completion of each required task and the entire project?
How would the court oversee the project and provide guidance to the
consultant, and who at the court would be responsible for coordinating
all project tasks and submitting quarterly progress and financial
status reports?
If the consultant has been identified, the applicant should provide
a letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in
and availability for the project, as well as the consultant's ability
to complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the
proposed cost. The consultant must agree to submit a detailed written
report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical
assistance.
(3) Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be
taken to facilitate implementation of the consultant's recommendations
upon completion of the technical assistance? For example, if the
support or cooperation of specific court officials or committees, other
agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or a court other than the
applicant would be needed to adopt the changes recommended by the
consultant and approved by the court, how would they be involved in the
review of the recommendations and development of the implementation
plan?
(4) Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its
Designated Agency or Council. Written concurrence on the need for the
technical assistance must be submitted. This concurrence may be a copy
of SJI Form B (see Appendix F) signed by the Chief Justice of the State
Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from the
State Chief Justice or designee. The concurrence may be submitted with
the applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to consideration
of the application. The concurrence also must specify whether the State
Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account for the grant
funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or a specified
agency or council to receive the funds directly.
b. For adaptation of a curriculum:
(1) Project Description. What is the title of the model curriculum
to be adapted and who originally developed it with Institute funding?
Why is this education program needed at the present time? What are the
project's goals? What are the learning objectives of the adapted
curriculum? What program components would be implemented, and what
types of modifications, if any, are anticipated in length, format,
learning objectives, teaching methods, or content? Who would be
responsible for adapting the model curriculum? Who would the
participants be, how many would there be, how would they be recruited,
and from where would they come (e.g., from across the State, from a
single local jurisdiction, from a multi-State region)?
(2) Need for Funding. Why are sufficient State or local resources
unavailable to fully support the modification and presentation of the
model curriculum? What is the potential for replicating or integrating
the adapted curriculum in the future using State or local funds, once
it has been successfully adapted and tested?
(3) Likelihood of Implementation. What is the proposed timeline,
including the project start and end dates? On what date(s) would the
judicial branch education program be presented? What process would be
used to modify and present the program? Who would serve as faculty, and
how were they selected? What measures would be taken to facilitate
subsequent presentations of the program? (Ordinarily, an independent
evaluation of a curriculum adaptation project is not required; however,
the results of any evaluation should be included in the final report.)
(4) Expressions of Interest by Judges and/or Court Personnel. Does
the proposed program have the support of the court system leadership,
and of judges, court managers, and judicial branch education personnel
who are expected to attend? (Applicants may demonstrate this by
attaching letters of support.)
(5) Chief Justice's Concurrence. Local courts should attach a
concurrence form signed by the Chief Justice of the State
[[Page 57570]]
or his or her designee. (See Form B, appendix F.)
4. Budget and Matching State Contribution
Applicants should attach a copy of budget Form E (see appendix G)
and a budget narrative (see A.4. in this section) that describes the
basis for the computation of all project-related costs and the source
of the match offered. As with other awards to State or local courts,
match must be provided in an amount equal to at least 50% of the grant
amount requested. Recipients of JBE TA grants are not required to
provide a cash match. The Institute may waive the match requirements in
certain circumstances. See section VIII.A.8.c.
5. Submission Requirements
Letters of application may be submitted at any time; however, all
of the letters received during a calendar quarter will be considered at
one time. Applicants submitting letters by September 26, 2003 will be
notified of the Board's decision by December 5, 2003. Those submitting
letters between September 27, 2003, and January 9, 2004 will be
notified of the Institute's decision by April 2, 2004; those submitting
letters between January 10 and February 27, 2004 will be notified by
June 11, 2004; those submitting letters between March 1 and June 4,
2004 will be notified by August 27, 2004; and those submitting letters
between June 5 and September 24, 2004 will be notified by December 10,
2004.
For curriculum adaptation requests, applicants should allow at
least 60 days between the notification deadline and the date of the
proposed program to allow sufficient time for needed planning. For
example, a court that plans to conduct an education program in June
2004 should submit its application no later than January 9, 2004, in
time for the Board's decision by April 2, 2004.
F. Scholarships
1. Purpose and Scope
The purposes of the Institute scholarship program are to enhance
the skills, knowledge, and abilities of judges and court managers;
enable State court judges and court managers to attend out-of-State
educational programs sponsored by national and State providers that
they could not otherwise attend because of limited State, local, and
personal budgets; and provide States, judicial educators, and the
Institute with evaluative information on a range of judicial and court-
related education programs.
Scholarships will be granted to individuals only for the purpose of
attending an educational program in another State. An applicant may
apply for a scholarship for only one educational program during any one
application cycle.
Scholarship funds may be used only to cover the costs of tuition
and transportation expenses. Transportation expenses may include round-
trip coach airfare or train fare. Scholarship recipients are strongly
encouraged to take advantage of excursion or other special airfares
(e.g., reductions offered when a ticket is purchased 21 days in advance
of the travel date) when making their travel arrangements. Recipients
who drive to a program site may receive $.36/mile up to the amount of
the advanced-purchase round-trip airfare between their homes and the
program sites. Funds to pay tuition and transportation expenses in
excess of $1,500 and other costs of attending the program--such as
lodging, meals, materials, transportation to and from airports, and
local transportation (including rental cars)--at the program site must
be obtained from other sources or borne by the scholarship recipient.
Scholarship applicants are encouraged to check other sources of
financial assistance and to combine aid from various sources whenever
possible.
A scholarship is not transferable to another individual. It may be
used only for the course specified in the application unless the
applicant's request to attend a different course that meets the
eligibility requirements is approved in writing by the Institute.
Decisions on such requests will be made within 30 days after the
receipt of the request letter.
2. Eligibility Requirements
For a summary of the Scholarship award process, visit the
Institute's Web site at http://www.statejustice.org and click on On-Line
Tutorials, then Scholarship.
a. Recipients. Scholarships can be awarded only to full-time judges
of State or local trial and appellate courts; full-time professional,
State, or local court personnel with management responsibilities; and
supervisory and management probation personnel in judicial branch
probation offices. Senior judges, part-time judges, quasi-judicial
hearing officers including referees and commissioners, administrative
law judges, staff attorneys, law clerks, line staff, law enforcement
officers, and other executive branch personnel are not eligible to
receive a scholarship.
b. Courses. A Scholarship can be awarded only for a course
presented in a State other than the one in which the applicant resides
or works. The course must be designed to enhance the skills of new or
experienced judges and court managers; address any of the topics listed
in the Institute's Special Interest categories; or be offered by a
recognized graduate program for judges or court managers. The annual or
mid-year meeting of a State or national organization of which the
applicant is a member does not qualify as an out-of-State educational
program for scholarship purposes, even though it may include workshops
or other training sessions.
Applicants are encouraged not to wait for the decision on a
scholarship to register for an educational program they wish to attend.
3. Forms
a. Scholarship Application--FORM S-1 (Appendix H). The Scholarship
Application requests basic information about the applicant and the
educational program the applicant would like to attend. It also
addresses the applicant's commitment to share the skills and knowledge
gained with local court colleagues and to submit an evaluation of the
program the applicant attends. The Scholarship Application must bear
the original signature of the applicant. Faxed or photocopied
signatures will not be accepted.
b. Scholarship Application Concurrence--FORM S-2 (Appendix H).
Judges and court managers applying for Scholarships must submit the
written concurrence of the Chief Justice of the State's Supreme Court
(or the Chief Justice's designee) on the Institute's Judicial Education
Scholarship Concurrence form (see Appendix H). The signature of the
presiding judge of the applicant's court cannot be substituted for that
of the Chief Justice or the Chief Justice's designee. Court managers,
other than elected clerks of court, also must submit a letter of
support from their immediate supervisors.
4. Submission Requirements
Scholarship applications must be submitted during the periods
specified below:
October 6 and December 1, 2003, for programs beginning between
January 1 and March 31, 2004;
January 5 and March 1, 2004 for programs beginning between April 1
and June 30, 2004;
April 5 and May 31, 2004 for programs beginning between July 1 and
September 30, 2004;
July 6 and August 30, 2004 for programs beginning between October 1
and December 31, 2004; and
[[Page 57571]]
October 4 and November 29, 2004 for programs beginning between
January 1 and March 31, 2005.
No exceptions or extensions will be granted. Applications sent
prior to the beginning of an application period will be treated as
having been sent one week after the beginning of that application
period. All the required items must be received for an application to
be considered. If the Concurrence form or letter of support is sent
separately from the application, the postmark date of the last item to
be sent will be used in applying the above criteria.
All applications should be sent by mail or courier (not fax or e-
mail) to: Scholarship Program Coordinator, State Justice Institute,
1650 King Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.
VII. Application Review Procedures
A. Preliminary Inquiries
The Institute staff will answer inquiries concerning application
procedures. The staff contact will be named in the Institute's letter
acknowledging receipt of the application.
B. Selection Criteria
1. Project Grant and Continuation Grant Applications
a. All applications will be rated on the basis of the criteria set
forth below. The Institute will accord the greatest weight to the
following criteria:
(1) The soundness of the methodology;
(2) The demonstration of need for the project;
(3) The appropriateness of the proposed evaluation design;
(4) The applicant's management plan and organizational
capabilities;
(5) The qualifications of the project's staff;
(6) The products and benefits resulting from the project, including
the extent to which the project will have long-term benefits for State
courts across the nation;
(7) The degree to which the findings, procedures, training,
technology, or other results of the project can be transferred to other
jurisdictions;
(8) The reasonableness of the proposed budget;
(9) The demonstration of cooperation and support of other agencies
that may be affected by the project; and
(10) The proposed project's relationship to one of the Special
Interest categories set forth in section II.A.
b. For continuation grant applications, the key findings and
recommendations of evaluations and the proposed responses to those
findings and recommendations also will be considered.
c. In determining which projects to support, the Institute will
also consider whether the applicant is a State court, a national court
support or education organization, a non-court unit of government, or
other type of entity eligible to receive grants under the Institute's
enabling legislation (see section IV.); the availability of financial
assistance from other sources for the project; the amount and nature
(cash and in-kind) of the applicant's match; the extent to which the
proposed project would also benefit the Federal courts or help State
courts enforce Federal constitutional and legislative requirements; and
the level of appropriations available to the Institute in the current
year and the amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal
years.
2. Technical Assistance Grant Applications
Technical Assistance Grant applications will be rated on the basis
of the following criteria:
a. Whether the assistance would address a critical need of the
court;
b. The soundness of the technical assistance approach to the
problem;
c. The qualifications of the consultant(s) to be hired, or the
specific criteria that will be used to select the consultant(s);
d. The court's commitment to act on the consultant's
recommendations; and
e. The reasonableness of the proposed budget.
The Institute also will consider factors such as the level and
nature of the match that would be provided, diversity of subject
matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations available to
the Institute in the current year, and the amount expected to be
available in succeeding fiscal years.
3. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grant Applications
Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grant applications
will be rated on the basis of the following criteria:
a. For on-site consultant assistance:
(1) Whether the assistance would address a critical need of the
court;
(2) The soundness of the technical assistance approach to the
problem;
(3) The qualifications of the consultant(s) to be hired, or the
specific criteria that will be used to select the consultant(s);
(4) The court's commitment to act on the consultant's
recommendations; and
(5) The reasonableness of the proposed budget.
b. For curriculum adaptation projects:
(1) The goals and objectives of the proposed project;
(2) The need for outside funding to support the program;
(3) The appropriateness of the approach in achieving the project's
educational objectives;
(4) The likelihood of effective implementation and integration of
the modified curriculum into the State's or local jurisdiction's
ongoing educational programming; and
(5) Expressions of interest by the judges and/or court personnel
who would be directly involved in or affected by the project.
The Institute will also consider factors such as the reasonableness
of the amount requested, compliance with match requirements, diversity
of subject matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations
available in the current year, and the amount expected to be available
in succeeding fiscal years.
4. Scholarships
Scholarships will be awarded on the basis of:
a. The date on which the application and concurrence (and support
letter, if required) were sent;
b. The unavailability of State or local funds to cover the costs of
attending the program or scholarship funds from another source;
c. The absence of educational programs in the applicant's State
addressing the topic(s) covered by the educational program for which
the scholarship is being sought;
d. Geographic balance among the recipients;
e. The balance of scholarships among educational programs;
f. The balance of scholarships among the types of courts
represented; and
g. The level of appropriations available to the Institute in the
current year and the amount expected to be available in succeeding
fiscal years.
The postmark or courier receipt will be used to determine the date
on which the application form and other required items were sent.
C. Review and Approval Process
1. Project and Continuation Grant Applications
The Institute's Board of Directors will review the applications
competitively. The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary and
a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant selection criterion
for applications that fall within the scope of the Institute's grant
program and merit serious consideration by the Board. The staff
[[Page 57572]]
will also prepare a list of those applications that, in the judgment of
the Executive Director, propose projects that lie outside the scope of
the Institute's program or are not likely to merit serious
consideration by the Board. The staff will present the narrative
summaries, rating sheets, and list of non-reviewed papers to the Board
for its review. Board committees will review application summaries
within assigned program areas and prepare recommendations for the full
Board. The full Board of Directors will then decide which projects it
will fund. The decision to fund a project is solely that of the Board
of Directors.
The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of
the Institute.
2. Technical Assistance and Judicial Branch Education Technical
Assistance Grant Applications
The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary of each
application and a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant
selection criterion. A committee of the Board of Directors will review
the applications competitively. The Board of Directors has delegated
its authority to approve Technical Assistance and Judicial Branch
Education Technical Assistance Grants to the committee established for
each program.
The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of
the Institute.
3. Scholarships
A committee of the Institute's Board of Directors will review
Scholarship applications quarterly. The Board of Directors has
delegated its authority to approve Scholarships to the committee
established for the program.
The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of
the Institute.
D. Return Policy
Unless a specific request is made, unsuccessful applications will
not be returned. Applicants are advised that Institute records are
subject to the provisions of the Federal Freedom of Information Act, 5
U.S.C. 552.
E. Notification of Board Decision
1. The Institute will send written notice to applicants concerning
all Board decisions to approve, defer, or deny their respective
applications. For all applications (except Scholarships), the Institute
also will convey the key issues and questions that arose during the
review process. A decision by the Board to deny an application may not
be appealed, but it does not prohibit resubmission of a proposal based
on that application in a subsequent funding cycle. The Institute will
also notify the State court administrator when grants are approved by
the Board to support projects that will be conducted by or involve
courts in that State.
2. The Institute intends to notify each Scholarship applicant of
the Board committee's decision within 30 days after the close of the
relevant application period.
F. Response to Notification of Approval
With the exception of those approved for Scholarships, applicants
have 30 days from the date of the letter notifying them that the Board
has approved their application to respond to any revisions requested by
the Board. If the requested revisions (or a reasonable schedule for
submitting such revisions) have not been submitted to the Institute
within 30 days after notification, the approval may be rescinded and
the application presented to the Board for reconsideration.
VIII. Compliance Requirements
The State Justice Institute Act contains limitations and conditions
on grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements awarded by the
Institute. The Board of Directors has approved additional policies
governing the use of Institute grant funds. These statutory and policy
requirements are set forth below.
A. Recipients of Project Grants
1. Advocacy
No funds made available by the Institute may be used to support or
conduct training programs for the purpose of advocating particular
nonjudicial public policies or encouraging nonjudicial political
activities. 42 U.S.C. 10706(b).
2. Approval of Key Staff
If the qualifications of an employee or consultant assigned to a
key project staff position are not described in the application or if
there is a change of a person assigned to such a position, the
recipient must submit a description of the qualifications of the newly
assigned person to the Institute. Prior written approval of the
qualifications of the new person assigned to a key staff position must
be received from the Institute before the salary or consulting fee of
that person and associated costs may be paid or reimbursed from grant
funds.
3. Audit
Recipients of project grants must provide for an annual fiscal
audit which includes an opinion on whether the financial statements of
the grantee present fairly its financial position and its financial
operations are in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. (See section IX.K. of the Guideline for the requirements of
such audits.) Scholarship recipients and recipients of Solutions
Project State Court Information Collection Grants, Judicial Branch
Education Technical Assistance Grants, and Technical Assistance Grants
are not required to submit an audit, but they must maintain appropriate
documentation to support all expenditures.
4. Budget Revisions
Budget revisions among direct cost categories that (i) transfer
grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (ii) individually or
cumulatively exceed five percent of the approved original budget or the
most recently approved revised budget require prior Institute approval.
5. Conflict of Interest
Personnel and other officials connected with Institute-funded
programs must adhere to the following requirements:
a. No official or employee of a recipient court or organization
shall participate personally through decision, approval, disapproval,
recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise in
any proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other
determination, contract, grant, cooperative agreement, claim,
controversy, or other particular matter in which Institute funds are
used, where, to his or her knowledge, he or she or his or her immediate
family, partners, organization other than a public agency in which he
or she is serving as officer, director, trustee, partner, or employee
or any person or organization with whom he or she is negotiating or has
any arrangement concerning prospective employment, has a financial
interest.
b. In the use of Institute project funds, an official or employee
of a recipient court or organization shall avoid any action which might
result in or create the appearance of:
(1) Using an official position for private gain; or
(2) affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the
integrity of the Institute program.
c. Requests for proposals or invitations for bids issued by a
recipient of Institute funds or a subgrantee or subcontractor will
provide notice to prospective bidders that the contractors who develop
or draft specifications,
[[Page 57573]]
requirements, statements of work, and/or requests for proposals for a
proposed procurement will be excluded from bidding on or submitting a
proposal to compete for the award of such procurement.
6. Inventions and Patents
If any patentable items, patent rights, processes, or inventions
are produced in the course of Institute-sponsored work, such fact shall
be promptly and fully reported to the Institute. Unless there is a
prior agreement between the grantee and the Institute on disposition of
such items, the Institute shall determine whether protection of the
invention or discovery shall be sought. The Institute will also
determine how the rights in the invention or discovery, including
rights under any patent issued thereon, shall be allocated and
administered in order to protect the public interest consistent with
``Government Patent Policy'' (President's Memorandum for Heads of
Executive Departments and Agencies, February 18, 1983, and statement of
Government Patent Policy).
7. Lobbying
a. Funds awarded to recipients by the Institute shall not be used,
indirectly or directly, to influence Executive Orders or similar
promulgations by Federal, State or local agencies, or to influence the
passage or defeat of any legislation by Federal, State or local
legislative bodies. 42 U.S.C. 10706(a).
b. It is the policy of the Board of Directors to award funds only
to support applications submitted by organizations that would carry out
the objectives of their applications in an unbiased manner. Consistent
with this policy and the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 10706, the Institute
will not knowingly award a grant to an applicant that has, directly or
through an entity that is part of the same organization as the
applicant, advocated a position before Congress on the specific subject
matter of the application.
8. Matching Requirements
All grantees other than scholarship recipients and individuals who
receive ``think piece'' grants are required to provide match. See
section III.L. for the definition of match. The amount and nature of
required match depends on the type of organization receiving the grant
and the duration of the Institute's support.
The grantee is responsible for ensuring that the total amount of
match proposed is actually contributed. If a proposed contribution is
not fully met, the Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly,
in order to maintain the ratio originally provided for in the award
agreement (see section IX.E.1.).
The Board of Directors considers the amount and nature of
unrequired match contributed by applicants in making grant decisions.
Cash match and non-cash match may be provided, subject to the
requirements of subsections a. and b. below.
a. New Project Grants.
(1) State and local units of government. All awards to courts or
other units of State or local government (not including publicly
supported institutions of higher education) require a match from
private or public sources of not less than 50% of the total amount of
the Institute's award. For example, if a State court or executive
branch agency receives a $100,000 grant from the Institute, it must
provide a $50,000 match (50% of the $100,000 awarded by SJI). With the
exception of Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants, at
least 20% of the required match for a new grant ($10,000 in the
example) must be provided in the form of cash rather than in-kind
support (e.g., the value of staff time contributed to the project).
(2) All other grantees. All other grantees are required to
contribute a match of 25% to a new SJI-funded project. For example, if
a non-profit organization receives a $100,000 grant from SJI, it must
provide a $25,000 match. A non-profit organization must provide at
least 10% of the required match for a new grant ($2,500 in the example)
in the form of cash.
b. Continuation Grants. All grantees are required to assume a
greater share of project support over time.
(1) State and local units of government. State and local units of
government are requir