[Federal Register: December 2, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 231)]
[Notices]
[Page 71619-71667]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02de02-158]
[[Page 71619]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
State Justice Institute
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant Guideline; Notice
[[Page 71620]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE
Grant Guideline
AGENCY: State Justice Institute.
ACTION: Final grant guideline.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Guideline sets forth the administrative, programmatic,
and financial requirements attendant to Fiscal Year 2003 State Justice
Institute grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 2, 2002.
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. Complete information about the Institute and its grant
programs, including tutorials, forms, and instructions for all grant
applications, can be found at http://www.statejustice.org.
This Guideline is being published at a time when the Institute is
operating on a Continuing Resolution (CR) that expires on January 11,
2003. The Guideline is contingent on further action by Congress to
either extend the CR or enact an appropriations bill funding the
Institute in FY 2003 at no less than the level approved by the Senate
Appropriations Committee ($3.1 million).
Types of Grants Available and Funding Schedules
SJI offers five types of grants in FY 2003: Project Grants,
Technical Assistance (TA) Grants, Judicial Branch Education Technical
Assistance (JBE TA) Grants, Continuation Grants, and Scholarships.
Project Grants
The Guideline allocates up to $2 million for Project Grants in FY
2003, in addition to the $800,000 in FY 2003 and 2004 funds allocated
for the Solutions Project described below.
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 $200,000 a year; however, grants in excess of
$150,000 are likely to be rare, and awarded only to support projects
likely to have a significant national impact.
The Solutions Project is a multi-stage project 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. The Project will entail five steps:
(1) Information collection about the specific needs of State
courts, the efforts they have made to address them, and other possible
responses to those needs;
(2) Information analysis;
(3) A national event to identify the most promising solutions to
the State courts' most critical problems;
(4) Development of a comprehensive catalogue of promising
solutions; and
(5) Distribution of a final product, clearly stating both the
problems facing State courts as well as real and promising solutions,
to State court leaders, Congress, and other interested parties.
The first step of the Solutions Project is well under way. Twenty-
three (23) States have submitted information collection grant
applications requesting approximately $450,000. The Board of Directors
anticipates awarding grants to support these applications before the
end of the year. Applicants interested in a grant to support the
remaining steps of the Solutions Project may obtain information about
these projects upon request. Interested applicants are encouraged to
include creative uses of technology to maximize participation in the
remaining phases of the project as well as distribution of the final
product. See sections II.C. and VI.C.
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.
All project grant applications, including ``think piece''
proposals, must address a topic included in the five Special Interest
categories listed in the Guideline.
The deadline for submitting Project Grant applications (including
Solutions Project applications) is February 7, 2003. The Board of
Directors will meet in early May 2003 to approve grant awards. See
section VI.A. for project grant application procedures.
Technical Assistance Grants
Section II.C. reserves up to $300,000 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 January 10,
2003 will be notified by March 28, 2003; those submitting letters
between January 11 and February 28, 2003 will be notified by May 30,
2003; those submitting letters between March 1 and June 6, 2003 will be
notified by August 29, 2003; and those submitting letters between June
7 and September 26, 2003 will be notified of the Board's decision by
December 12, 2003. See section VI.E. for Technical Assistance Grant
application procedures.
Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants
The Guideline implements an expansion of the Institute's former
Curriculum Adaptation grant program that was proposed for comment last
year. Up to $300,000 will be allocated for grants under the expanded
program, which is renamed the Judicial Branch Education Technical
Assistance (JBE TA) grant program. Grants of up to $20,000 are
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.
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 January 10, 2003 will be notified
by March 28, 2003; those submitting letters between January 11 and
February 28, 2003 will be notified by May 30, 2003; those submitting
letters between March 1 and June 6, 2003 will be notified by August 29,
2003; and those submitting letters between June 7 and September 26,
2003 will be notified of the Board's decision by December 12, 2003. See
section VI.F. for JBE TA Grant application procedures.
Scholarships
The Guideline allocates up to $200,000 of FY 2003 funds for
scholarships to enable judges and court managers to attend out-of-State
education and training programs.
[[Page 71621]]
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 April 1 and June 30, 2003 must submit their
applications and documents between January 3 and March 3, 2003. For
programs beginning between July 1 and September 30, 2003, the
applications and documents must be submitted between April 1 and June
2, 2003. For programs beginning between October 1 and December 31,
2003, the applications and documents must be submitted between July 7
and August 29, 2003. For programs beginning between January 1 and March
31, 2004, the applications and documents must be submitted between
October 1 and December 1, 2003. See section VI.G. for Scholarship
application procedures.
Continuation Grants
Continuation Grants (see sections III.F, V.B.2., and VI.B.) are
intended to enhance the specific program or service begun 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 Project Grants in FY 2003, i.e., $400,000. Grantees
should accordingly be aware that the award of a grant to support a
project does not constitute a commitment to provide continuation
funding. No grant awarded in FY 2003 will 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.
Response to Comments
The Proposed Guideline generated a substantial number of comments,
many of which sought clarification and, in some cases, elimination of
the policy that would require all grantees to provide matching funds to
support their SJI-supported projects. After consideration of the
comments and a review of Federal grant match policies, SJI has decided
to retain the match requirement for all grantees but to add provisions
that would permit the Institute to waive the match and cash match
requirements in certain circumstances. See revised section VIII.A.8.
The Final Guideline also revises prior Institute policy by
permitting project income, e.g., tuition and proceeds from the sale of
grant products, to be used as match. See sections III.O. and IX.G.3.
and 4.
In addition, section III.L. of the Guideline has been revised to
clarify what the Institute considers cash match and in-kind match. See
also section 7 of Appendix A--Recommendations to Grantwriters for
further guidance on match issues.
The following discussion summarizes the Final Guideline's match
requirements.
Match requirements for State and local units of government. The
Guideline applies the statutorily-mandated requirement that
governmental grantees provide matching support equal to 50% of a new
SJI-funded project (see 42 U.S.C. 10705(d)), subject to the statutory
waiver provision noted below. Except for Solutions Project Information
Collection grants made under section VI.C. of the Guideline, at least
20% of the required match must be in cash.
Example. If a court receives a $100,000 grant from the Institute,
it must provide a $50,000 match. Under the Final Guideline, the court
must 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.
Match requirements for all other grantees. The Guideline requires
all other grantees (except scholarship recipients and individuals who
receive grants to develop ``think pieces'') to contribute a match of
25% to a new SJI-funded project. At least 10% of the required match
must be in cash.
Example. If a non-profit organization receives a $100,000 grant
from SJI, it must provide a $25,000 match. Under the Guideline, a non-
profit must provide at least 10% of the required match for a new grant
($2,500 in the example) in the form of cash.
Waivers. An applicant may request a waiver of the match
requirement, the cash match requirement, or both, in its application.
See section VIII.A.8.c.
For State and local government grantees, the Institute's enabling
legislation provides that the match requirement may be waived by the
Board of Directors in ``exceptionally rare circumstances.'' The
Guideline incorporates this requirement in section VIII.A.8.c.(1)(a).
Section VIII.A.8.c.(1)(b) permits a waiver by non-profit organizations
in similar circumstances.
For grantees required to provide cash match, section VIII.A.8.c.(2)
requires an applicant seeking a waiver to demonstrate that it would be
a financial hardship to meet the requirement.
Section VIII.A.8.c.(3) encourages all applicants to provide the
largest amount of cash and in-kind match they can, even if it does not
meet the level required.
Cash Match. Ordinarily, the Institute will consider the following
types of match to be cash match:
[sbull] The dedication of funds to support a new employee or
purchase new equipment to carry out the project;
[sbull] 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);
[sbull] Any other reduction in the indirect cost rate to be charged
to the grant; and
[sbull] The application of project income (e.g., tuition or the
proceeds of sales of grant products) to grant costs.
Ordinarily, the Institute will consider the donation of time by
current staff or advisory committee members to the project to be in-
kind match. See section III.L.
Continuation grants. Subject to the granting of a waiver of all or
part of the match requirement in a particular year, all grantees will
be required to assume a greater share of project support over time. See
section VIII.A.8.b.
State and local units of government must 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.
Example. If SJI awards a State court $100,000 for the first year of
a grant, the court must provide $50,000 in match. If the second-year
grant is also $100,000, the court must provide $60,000 in match. A
court that wishes to limit its second-year contribution to $50,000 can
ask SJI for a reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 60%
requirement.
All other grantees must 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.
Example. If SJI awards a non-profit organization $100,000 for the
first year
[[Page 71622]]
of a grant, the organization must provide $25,000 in match. If the
second year grant is also $100,000, the court must provide $30,000 in
match. An organization that wishes to limit its second-year
contribution to $25,000 can ask SJI for a reduced amount, i.e.,
$83,333, in order to meet the 30% requirement.
Other comments recommended that the Institute reconsider its
proposal to impose a five-year limit on continuation grants. Although
the Institute may reconsider that change in future years, depending on
its appropriation level and its experience with the change, this year's
Final Guideline includes the limitation.
Recommendations to Grantwriters
Recommendations to Grantwriters may be found in Appendix A.
The following Grant Guideline is adopted by the State Justice
Institute for FY 2003:
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)
I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute
The Institute was established by Pub. L. 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
2003, 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 (1) it falls within the
scope of the Special Interest program categories designated below; or
(2) information coming to the attention of the Institute from the State
courts, their affiliated organizations, the research literature, or
other sources demonstrates that the project responds to another special
need or interest of the State courts.
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 new approaches to enhance public access
to the courts,
[[Page 71623]]
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, if successfully implemented, would
significantly re-engineer the way that courts currently do business,
including projects that would:
[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, 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 innovative applications of voice
recognition technologies in the adjudication process;
[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] 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;
[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; and
[sbull] Develop and test educational programs to assure that
everyone coming into contact with courts serving children and families
is treated with dignity, respect, and courtesy.
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 educational programs that:
[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;
[sbull] Educate judges and court officials about the threat of
terrorism and steps they can take to effectively protect courthouses
against acts of terrorism;
[sbull] Assist judges, court managers, community leaders, and other
State or local government agency administrators in collaboratively
developing and evaluating courthouse security policies
[[Page 71624]]
and programs, and disaster recovery plans;
[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; and
[sbull] Examine the long-term cognitive effects of substance abuse
(including alcohol) and their implications for compliance with court
orders, probation conditions, release, visitation orders, etc.
b. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Projects. The
Board is reserving up to $300,000 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) are to:
(1) Provide State and local courts with expert assistance in
developing systematic or innovative judicial branch education
programming as well as improved methods for assessing the need for and
evaluating the impact of court education programs; 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.F.
c. Scholarships for Judges and Court Managers. The Institute is
reserving up to $200,000 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 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.G.
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] Coordinate and process mass tort cases fairly and
efficiently at the trial and appellate levels; and
[sbull] Provide technical assistance nationwide to help court
officials 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.
C. The Solutions Project
1. Overview
The Board of Directors is reserving up to $800,000 to support the
Solutions Project, 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.
The process will entail five steps:
A. Information collection about the specific needs of the State
courts, the efforts the courts have made to date to address those
needs, and other possible solutions;
B. Information analysis;
C. A national event, e.g. an in-person or virtual conference, to
identify the most promising solutions to the State courts' most
critical problems;
D. Development of a comprehensive catalogue of promising solutions;
and;
E. Distribution of a final product clearly stating both the
problems facing State courts, as well as real and promising solutions,
to State court leaders and other interested parties.
2. State Court Information Collection Grants
Grants of up to $20,000 are available to State court systems
interested in undertaking a town hall meeting, focus groups, survey(s),
or other initiatives designed to (a) collect information about the
problems facing their courts, (b) assess the effectiveness of the
solutions the court system has developed to respond to those problems,
or (c) solicit the public's recommendations about other potential
solutions. Only State supreme courts or State court administrative
offices may apply for these grants. See section VI.C.1. for the
application procedures.
A grant or grants will be awarded to support the remaining work
outlined in the five steps listed above. Applicants are encouraged to
include creative uses of technology to maximize participation in the
project and distribution of the final product. Applications should
conform to the requirements set forth in section VI.A. for Project
Grants.
D. Technical Assistance Grants
The Board will set aside up to $300,000 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,
[[Page 71625]]
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.E.
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.
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.D. 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 also section VI.F. 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;
[[Page 71626]]
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 $200,000 a year;
however, a grant in excess of $150,000 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.G.
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 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.E. 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.
As part of the Solutions Project, the Institute will make grants
available to State court systems to support the collection of
information about the most critical problems facing the State courts,
and promising solutions to those problems. See sections II.C. and VI.C.
2. Continuation Grants
See sections III.D. and VI.D. In FY 2003, 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.E. In FY 2003, the Institute is reserving
up to $300,000 for these grants.
4. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants
See sections II.A.4.b., III.K., and VI.F. In FY 2003, the Institute
is reserving up to $300,000 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.G. In FY 2003, the Institute
is reserving up to $200,000 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 $200,000 for
15 months, although new and continuation awards in excess of $150,000
are likely to be rare and to be made, if at all, only
[[Page 71627]]
for highly promising proposals that will have a significant impact
nationally.
2. Applicants for Solutions Project Grants may request funding in
amounts up to $20,000.
3. Applicants for Technical Assistance Grants may request funding
in amounts up to $30,000.
4. Applicants for Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance
Grants may request funding in amounts up to $20,000.
5. 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
awarded in FY 2003 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 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 funding for the project is approved by the
Institute, 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
[[Page 71628]]
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.
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
[[Page 71629]]
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 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 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, 2003.
4. Budget Narrative
The budget narrative should provide the basis for the computation
of all
[[Page 71630]]
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.
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.
l. 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 Solutions Project Information Collection
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.
[[Page 71631]]
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 7, 2003. 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
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. Solutions Project Grants
1. State Court Information Collection Grants
Solutions Project Grants of up to $20,000 are available to State
court systems to support the costs of town hall meetings, focus groups,
surveys, or other information-gathering initiatives designed to (a)
identify the critical problems facing the State's courts, (b) assess
the effectiveness of the solutions the court system has developed to
respond to those problems, or (c) solicit the public's recommendations
about other potential solutions.
a. Application Procedures
In lieu of applications, applicants may submit a two-page letter
describing how they propose to gather the information on critical
problems and promising solutions. The letter must be signed by either
the chief justice of the State supreme court or the State court
administrator.
b. Application Format
Although there is no prescribed form for the letter, it should
describe briefly the nature of the problem(s) sought to be addressed,
the mechanism(s) to be used to collect the information sought, who
would oversee the collection process, the anticipated time frame
required to complete the process, and the manner and form in which the
information would be submitted to the Institute.
c. Budget and Matching State Contribution
A completed Form C (Budget) and budget narrative must be included
with the letter requesting the Solutions Project Grant. The budget
narrative should provide the basis for all costs. If the information-
gathering process entails the involvement of a consultant, applicants
should be aware that consultant rates above $300 per day must be
approved in advance by the Institute, and no consultant will be paid
more than $900 per day from Institute funds.
As with all Institute grants to State and local courts, applicants
must provide matching support equal to 50% of the amount requested from
the Institute; however, no cash match is required for Solutions Project
Grants.
Recipients of Solutions Project Grants do not have to submit an
audit but must maintain appropriate documentation to support all
expenditures (see section VIII.A.3.).
d. Submission Requirements
Letters requesting Solutions Project Grants must be postmarked no
later than October 25, 2002. Please mark SOLUTIONS PROJECT on the
envelope and send it to: State Justice Institute, 1650 King Street,
Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.
2. National Solutions Project Grant(s)
A grant or grants will be awarded to support the analysis and
dissemination of the information collected by the State court systems.
The proposed project design should describe:
[[Page 71632]]
[sbull] The processes that would be used to analyze the information
gathered by the participating State court systems;
[sbull] The type and size of national event (e.g., an in-person or
virtual conference) that would be held to identify the most promising
solutions to the State courts' most critical problems;
[sbull] The methods that would be used to compile a comprehensive
catalogue of promising solutions; and
[sbull] The format of the final product, which should clearly state
both the problems facing State courts, as well as real and promising
solutions, and how it would be distributed to State court leaders and
other interested parties.
a. Application Procedures
Applications should conform to the requirements for Project Grants
outlined in section VI.A.
b. Submission Requirements
The submission requirements set forth in section VI.A.5 apply to
these applications.
D. 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 awarded in FY 2003 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).
[[Page 71633]]
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 match. A non-profit organization must provide at
least 10% of the required match in the form of cash.
iii. For the purpose of calculating match requirements for
continuation grants, an award in FY 2003 will constitute the first year
of the project, regardless of whether the project was funded initially
in a prior year.
iv. 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.
E. 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
(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 January 10, 2003 will be
notified of the Institute's decision by March 28, 2003; those
submitting letters between January 11 and February 28, 2003 will be
notified by May 30, 2003; those
[[Page 71634]]
submitting letters between March 1 and June 6, 2003 will be notified by
August 29, 2003; and those submitting letters between June 7 and
September 26, 2003 will be notified by December 12, 2003.
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 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 February 7, April 10,
July 3, and October 16, 2003).
F. 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) Expert assistance in
planning, developing, and administering State judicial branch education
programs; 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 developing
systematic or innovative judicial branch educational programming. The
assistance might include 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
(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
[[Page 71635]]
the court system leadership, and of judges, court managers, and
judicial branch education personnel who are expected to attend? (This
may be demonstrated 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 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, 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.
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 January 10, 2003 will be
notified of the Board's decision by March 28, 2003; those submitting
letters between January 11 and February 28, 2003 will be notified by
May 30, 2003; those submitting letters between March 1 and June 6, 2003
will be notified by August 29, 2003; and those submitting letters
between June 7 and September 26, 2003 will be notified by December 12,
2003.
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 late May
2003 should submit its application no later than January 10, 2003, in
time for the Board's decision by March 28, 2003.
G. 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 $.345/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 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:
January 3 and March 3, 2003 for programs beginning between
April 1 and June 30, 2003; April 1 and June 2, 2003 for programs
beginning between July 1 and September 30, 2003;
[[Page 71636]]
July 7 and August 29, 2003 for programs beginning between October 1
and December 31, 2003; and
October 1 and December 1, 2003 for programs beginning between
January 1 and March 31, 2004.
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
Applications will be reviewed competitively by the Board of
Directors. The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary of each
application and a rating sheet assigning points for
[[Page 71637]]
each relevant selection criterion. When necessary, applications may
also be reviewed by outside experts. Committees of the Board will
review applications within assigned program categories and prepare
recommendations to the full Board. The full Board of Directors will
then decide which applications to approve for grants. The decision to
award a grant is solely that of the Board of Directors.
Awards approved by the Board will be signed by the Chairman of the
Board 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. Applications will be reviewed competitively by a
committee of the Board of Directors. 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.
Approved awards will be signed by the Chairman of the Board on
behalf of the Institute.
3. Scholarships
Scholarship applications are reviewed quarterly by a committee of
the Institute's Board of Directors. The Board of Directors has
delegated its authority to approve Scholarships to the committee
established for the program.
Approved awards will be signed by the Chairman of the Board 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, 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.
[[Page 71638]]
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 amount and nature of unrequired match contributed by applicants
is a factor the Board of Directors considers 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). 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 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
is required to provide $60,000 in match. A court that wishes to limit
its second-year contribution to $50,000 may ask the Institute for a
reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 60% requirement.
(2) All other grantees. All other grantees are required to 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 must provide $25,000 in
match. If the second-year grant is also $100,000, the grantee is
required to provide $30,000 in match. An organization that wishes to
limit its second-year contribution to $25,000 may ask the Institute for
a reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 30% requirement.
c. Waiver
(1) Match generally.
(a) The match requirement for State and local units of government
may be waived in exceptionally rare circumstances upon the request of
the Chief Justice of the highest court in the State and approval by the
Board of Directors. 42 U.S.C. 10705(d).
(b) The match requirement for all other grantees required to
provide match may be waived in exceptionally rare circumstances upon
the request of an appropriate official and approval by the Board of
Directors
(2) Cash match. For all grantees required to provide cash match,
the requirement may be waived upon the applicant's demonstration that
providing the required cash match will cause the applicant a financial
hardship.
(3) The Board of Directors encourages all applicants to provide the
maximum amount of in-kind and cash match possible, even if a waiver is
approved. The amount and nature of match are criteria in the grant
selection process. See section VII.B.1.c.
9. Nondiscrimination
No person may, on the basis of race, sex, national origin,
disability, color, or creed be excluded from participation in, denied
the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity supported by Institute funds. Recipients of
Institute funds must immediately take any measures necessary to
effectuate this provision.
10. Political Activities
No recipient may contribute or make available Institute funds,
program personnel, or equipment to any political party or association,
or the campaign of any candidate for public or party office. Recipients
are also prohibited from using funds in advocating or opposing any
ballot measure, initiative, or referendum. Officers and employees of
recipients shall not intentionally identify the Institute or recipients
with any partisan or nonpartisan political activity associated with a
political party or association, or the campaign of any candidate for
public or party office. 42 U.S.C. 10706(a).
[[Page 71639]]
11. Products
a. Acknowledgment, Logo, and Disclaimer
(1) Recipients of Institute funds must acknowledge prominently on
all products developed with grant funds that support was received from
the Institute. The ``SJI'' logo must appear on the front cover of a
written product, or in the opening frames of a video product, unless
another placement is approved in writing by the Institute. This
includes final products printed or otherwise reproduced during the
grant period, as well as reprintings or reproductions of those
materials following the end of the grant period. A camera-ready logo
sheet is available from the Institute upon request.
(2) Recipients also must display the following disclaimer on all
grant products: ``This [document, film, videotape, etc.] was developed
under [grant/cooperative agreement] number SJI-[insert number] from the
State Justice Institute. The points of view expressed are those of the
[author(s), filmmaker(s), etc.] and do not necessarily represent the
official position or policies of the State Justice Institute.''
b. Charges for Grant-Related Products/Recovery of Costs
(1) When Institute funds fully cover the cost of developing,
producing, and disseminating a product (e.g., a report, curriculum,
videotape, or software), the product should be distributed to the field
without charge. When Institute funds only partially cover the
development, production, or dissemination costs, the grantee may, with
the Institute's prior written approval, recover its costs for
developing, producing, and disseminating the material to those
requesting it, to the extent that those costs were not covered by
Institute funds or grantee matching contributions.
(2) Applicants should disclose their intent to sell grant-related
products in the application. Grantees must obtain the written prior
approval of the Institute of their plans to recover project costs
through the sale of grant products. Written requests to recover costs
ordinarily should be received during the grant period and should
specify the nature and extent of the costs to be recouped, the reason
that such costs were not budgeted (if the rationale was not disclosed
in the approved application), the number of copies to be sold, the
intended audience for the products to be sold, and the proposed sale
price. If the product is to be sold for more than $25, the written
request also should include a detailed itemization of costs that will
be recovered and a certification that the costs were not supported by
either Institute grant funds or grantee matching contributions.
(3) In the event that the sale of grant products results in
revenues that exceed the costs to develop, produce, and disseminate the
product, the revenue must continue to be used for the authorized
purposes of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent
with the State Justice Institute Act that have been approved by the
Institute. See sections III.O. and IX.G. for requirements regarding
project-related income realized during the project period.
c. Copyrights
Except as otherwise provided in the terms and conditions of an
Institute award, a recipient is free to copyright any books,
publications, or other copyrightable materials developed in the course
of an Institute-supported project, but the Institute shall reserve a
royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish,
or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, the materials for
purposes consistent with the State Justice Institute Act.
d. Distribution
In addition to the distribution specified in the grant application,
grantees shall send:
(1) Fifteen (15) copies of each final product developed with grant
funds to the Institute, unless the product was developed under either a
Technical Assistance or a Judicial Branch Education Technical
Assistance grant, in which case submission of 2 copies is required;
(2) an electronic version of the product in .html format to the
Institute; and
(3) one copy of each final product developed with grant funds to
the library established in each State to collect materials prepared
with Institute support. (A list of the libraries is contained in
Appendix C. Labels for these libraries are available on the Institute's
Web site, http://www.statejustice.org.) Grantees that develop web-based
electronic products must send 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. Recipients of
Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance and Technical Assistance
Grants are not required to submit final products to State libraries.
(5) A press release describing the project and announcing the
results to a list of national and State judicial branch organizations
provided by the Institute.
e. Institute Approval
No grant funds may be obligated for publication or reproduction of
a final product developed with grant funds without the written approval
of the Institute. Grantees shall submit a final draft of each written
product to the Institute for review and approval. The draft must be
submitted at least 30 days before the product is scheduled to be sent
for publication or reproduction to permit Institute review and
incorporation of any appropriate changes required by the Institute.
Grantees must provide for timely reviews by the Institute of videotape
or CD-ROM products at the treatment, script, rough cut, and final
stages of development or their equivalents.
f. Original Material
All products prepared as the result of Institute-supported projects
must be originally-developed material unless otherwise specified in the
award documents. Material not originally developed that is included in
such products must be properly identified, whether the material is in a
verbatim or extensive paraphrase format.
12. Prohibition Against Litigation Support
No funds made available by the Institute may be used directly or
indirectly to support legal assistance to parties in litigation,
including cases involving capital punishment.
13. Reporting Requirements
a. Recipients of Institute funds other than Scholarships must
submit Quarterly Progress and Financial Status Reports within 30 days
of the close of each calendar quarter (that is, no later than January
30, April 30, July 30, and October 30). Two copies of each report must
be sent. The Quarterly Progress Reports shall include a narrative
description of project activities during the calendar quarter, the
relationship between those activities and the task schedule and
objectives set forth in the approved application or an approved
adjustment thereto, any significant problem areas that have developed
and how they will be resolved, and the activities scheduled during the
next reporting period.
b. The quarterly Financial Status Report must be submitted in
accordance with section IX.H.2. of this Guideline. A
[[Page 71640]]
final project Progress Report and Financial Status Report shall be
submitted within 90 days after the end of the grant period in
accordance with section IX.L.1. of this Guideline.
14. Research
a. Availability of Research Data for Secondary Analysis
Upon request, grantees must make available for secondary analysis a
diskette(s) or data tape(s) containing research and evaluation data
collected under an Institute grant and the accompanying code manual.
Grantees may recover the actual cost of duplicating and mailing or
otherwise transmitting the data set and manual from the person or
organization requesting the data. Grantees may provide the requested
data set in the format in which it was created and analyzed.
b. Confidentiality of Information
Except as provided by Federal law other than the State Justice
Institute Act, no recipient of financial assistance from SJI may use or
reveal any research or statistical information furnished under the Act
by any person and identifiable to any specific private person for any
purpose other than the purpose for which the information was obtained.
Such information and copies thereof shall be immune from legal process,
and shall not, without the consent of the person furnishing such
information, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any
action, suit, or other judicial, legislative, or administrative
proceedings.
c. Human Subject Protection
All research involving human subjects shall be conducted with the
informed consent of those subjects and in a manner that will ensure
their privacy and freedom from risk or harm and the protection of
persons who are not subjects of the research but would be affected by
it, unless such procedures and safeguards would make the research
impractical. In such instances, the Institute must approve procedures
designed by the grantee to provide human subjects with relevant
information about the research after their involvement and to minimize
or eliminate risk or harm to those subjects due to their participation.
15. State and Local Court Applications
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 Supreme Court or its designee
shall receive, administer, and be accountable for all funds awarded on
the basis of such an application. 42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4).
16. Supplantation and Construction
To ensure that funds are used to supplement and improve the
operation of State courts, rather than to support basic court services,
funds shall not be used for the following purposes:
a. To supplant State or local funds supporting a program or
activity (such as paying the salary of court employees who would be
performing their normal duties as part of the project, or paying rent
for space which is part of the court's normal operations);
b. To construct court facilities or structures, except to remodel
existing facilities or to demonstrate new architectural or
technological techniques, or to provide temporary facilities for new
personnel or for personnel involved in a demonstration or experimental
program; or
c. Solely to purchase equipment.
17. Suspension of Funding
After providing a recipient reasonable notice and opportunity to
submit written documentation demonstrating why fund termination or
suspension should not occur, the Institute may terminate or suspend
funding of a project that fails to comply substantially with the Act,
the Guideline, or the terms and conditions of the award. 42 U.S.C.
10708(a).
18. Title to Property
At the conclusion of the project, title to all expendable and
nonexpendable personal property purchased with Institute funds shall
vest in the recipient court, organization, or individual that purchased
the property if certification is made to and approved by the Institute
that the property will continue to be used for the authorized purposes
of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent with the
State Justice Institute Act. If such certification is not made or the
Institute disapproves such certification, title to all such property
with an aggregate or individual value of $1,000 or more shall vest in
the Institute, which will direct the disposition of the property.
B. Recipients of Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance and
Technical Assistance Grants
Recipients of Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance and
Technical Assistance Grants must comply with the requirements listed in
section VIII.A. (except the requirements pertaining to audits in
section VIII.A.3. and product dissemination in section VIII.A.11.d. and
e.) and the reporting requirements below:
1. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grant Reporting
Requirements
Recipients of Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants
must:
a. Submit one copy of the manuals, handbooks, conference packets,
or consultant's report developed under the grant at the conclusion of
the grant period, along with a final report that includes any
evaluation results and explains how the grantee intends to present the
educational program in the future and/or implement the consultant's
recommendations, as well as two copies of the consultant's report; and
b. Complete a Technical Assistance Evaluation Form at the
conclusion of the grant period, if appropriate.
2. Technical Assistance Grant Reporting Requirements
Recipients of Technical Assistance Grants must:
a. Submit to the Institute one copy of a final report that explains
how it intends to act on the consultant's recommendations, as well as
two copies of the consultant's written report; and
b. Complete a Technical Assistance Evaluation Form at the
conclusion of the grant period.
C. Scholarship Recipients
1. Scholarship recipients are responsible for disseminating the
information received from the course to their court colleagues locally
and, if possible, throughout the State (e.g., by developing a formal
seminar, circulating the written material, or discussing the
information at a meeting or conference).
Recipients also must submit to the Institute a certificate of
attendance at the program, an evaluation of the educational program
they attended, and a copy of the notice of any scholarship funds
received from other sources. A copy of the evaluation must be sent to
the Chief Justice of the Scholarship recipient's State. A State or
local jurisdiction may impose additional requirements on scholarship
recipients.
2. To receive the funds authorized by a scholarship award,
recipients must submit a Scholarship Payment Voucher (Form S3) together
with a tuition statement from the program sponsor, and a transportation
fare receipt (or statement of the driving mileage to and from the
recipient's home to the site of the educational program).
Scholarship Payment Vouchers should be submitted within 90 days
[[Page 71641]]
after the end of the course which the recipient attended.
3. Scholarship recipients are encouraged to check with their tax
advisors to determine whether the scholarship constitutes taxable
income under Federal and State law.
IX. Financial Requirements
A. Purpose
The purpose of this section is to establish accounting system
requirements and offer guidance on procedures to assist all grantees,
subgrantees, contractors, and other organizations in:
1. Complying with the statutory requirements for the award,
disbursement, and accounting of funds;
2. Complying with regulatory requirements of the Institute for the
financial management and disposition of funds;
3. generating financial data to be used in planning, managing, and
controlling projects; and
4. facilitating an effective audit of funded programs and projects.
B. References
Except where inconsistent with specific provisions of this
Guideline, the following circulars are applicable to Institute grants
and cooperative agreements under the same terms and conditions that
apply to Federal grantees. The circulars supplement the requirements of
this section for accounting systems and financial record-keeping and
provide additional guidance on how these requirements may be satisfied.
(Circulars may be obtained from OMB by calling 202-395-3080 or visiting
the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB.)
1. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21, Cost
Principles for Educational Institutions.
2. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87, Cost
Principles for State and Local Governments.
3. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-88 (revised),
Indirect Cost Rates, Audit and Audit Follow-up at Educational
Institutions.
4. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-102, Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local
Governments.
5. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110, Grants and
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other
Non-Profit Organizations.
6. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-122, Cost
Principles for Non-profit Organizations.
7. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-128, Audits of
State and Local Governments.
8. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of
Institutions of Higher Education and Other Non-profit Institutions.
C. Supervision and Monitoring Responsibilities
1. Grantee Responsibilities
All grantees receiving awards from the Institute are responsible
for the management and fiscal control of all funds. Responsibilities
include accounting for receipts and expenditures, maintaining adequate
financial records, and refunding expenditures disallowed by audits.
2. Responsibilities of State Supreme Court
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. (See section III.F.)
b. The State Supreme Court or its designee shall receive all
Institute funds awarded to such courts; be responsible for assuring
proper administration of Institute funds; and be responsible for all
aspects of the project, including proper accounting and financial
record-keeping by the subgrantee. These responsibilities include:
(1) Reviewing Financial Operations. The State Supreme Court or its
designee should be familiar with, and periodically monitor, its
subgrantees' financial operations, records system, and procedures.
Particular attention should be directed to the maintenance of current
financial data.
(2) Recording Financial Activities. The subgrantee's grant award or
contract obligation, as well as cash advances and other financial
activities, should be recorded in the financial records of the State
Supreme Court or its designee in summary form. Subgrantee expenditures
should be recorded on the books of the State Supreme Court or evidenced
by report forms duly filed by the subgrantee. Matching contributions
provided by subgrantees should likewise be recorded, as should any
project income resulting from program operations.
(3) Budgeting and Budget Review. The State Supreme Court or its
designee should ensure that each subgrantee prepares an adequate budget
as the basis for its award commitment. The detail of each project
budget should be maintained on file by the State Supreme Court.
(4) Accounting for Match. The State Supreme Court or its designee
will ensure that subgrantees comply with the match requirements
specified in this Guideline (see section VIII.A.8.).
(5) Audit Requirement. The State Supreme Court or its designee is
required to ensure that subgrantees meet the necessary audit
requirements set forth by the Institute (see sections K. below and
VIII.A.3.)
(6) Reporting Irregularities. The State Supreme Court, its
designees, and its subgrantees are responsible for promptly reporting
to the Institute the nature and circumstances surrounding any financial
irregularities discovered.
D. Accounting System
The grantee is responsible for establishing and maintaining an
adequate system of accounting and internal controls and for ensuring
that an adequate system exists for each of its subgrantees and
contractors. An acceptable and adequate accounting system:
1. Properly accounts for receipt of funds under each grant awarded
and the expenditure of funds for each grant by category of expenditure
(including matching contributions and project income);
2. Assures that expended funds are applied to the appropriate
budget category included within the approved grant;
3. Presents and classifies historical costs of the grant as
required for budgetary and evaluation purposes;
4. Provides cost and property controls to assure optimal use of
grant funds;
5. Is integrated with a system of internal controls adequate to
safeguard the funds and assets covered, check the accuracy and
reliability of the accounting data, promote operational efficiency, and
assure conformance with any general or special conditions of the grant;
6. Meets the prescribed requirements for periodic financial
reporting of operations; and
7. Provides financial data for planning, control, measurement, and
evaluation of direct and indirect costs.
E. Total Cost Budgeting and Accounting
Accounting for all funds awarded by the Institute must be
structured and executed on a total project cost basis. That is, total
project costs, including Institute funds, State and local matching
shares, and any other fund sources included in the approved project
budget serve as the foundation for fiscal administration and
accounting. Grant applications and financial reports require budget and
cost estimates on the basis of total costs.
[[Page 71642]]
1. Timing of Matching Contributions
Matching contributions need not be applied at the exact time of the
obligation of Institute funds. Ordinarily, the full matching share must
be obligated during the award period; however, with the written
permission of the Institute, contributions made following approval of
the grant by the Institute's Board of Directors but before the
beginning of the grant may be counted as match. Grantees that do not
contemplate making matching contributions continuously throughout the
course of a project, or on a task-by-task basis, are required to submit
a schedule within 30 days after the beginning of the project period
indicating at what points during the project period the matching
contributions will be made. If a proposed cash or in-kind match is not
fully met, the Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly to
maintain the ratio of grant funds to matching funds stated in the award
agreement.
2. Records for Match
All grantees must maintain records which clearly show the source,
amount, and timing of all matching contributions. In addition, if a
project has included, within its approved budget, contributions which
exceed the required matching portion, the grantee must maintain records
of those contributions in the same manner as it does Institute funds
and required matching shares. For all grants made to State and local
courts, the State Supreme Court has primary responsibility for grantee/
subgrantee compliance with the requirements of this section. (See
section IX.C.2. above.)
F. Maintenance and Retention of Records
All financial records, including supporting documents, statistical
records, and all other information pertinent to grants, subgrants,
cooperative agreements, or contracts under grants, must be retained by
each organization participating in a project for at least three years
for purposes of examination and audit. State Supreme Courts may impose
record retention and maintenance requirements in addition to those
prescribed in this section.
1. Coverage
The retention requirement extends to books of original entry,
source documents supporting accounting transactions, the general
ledger, subsidiary ledgers, personnel and payroll records, canceled
checks, and related documents and records. Source documents include
copies of all grant and subgrant awards, applications, and required
grantee/subgrantee financial and narrative reports. Personnel and
payroll records shall include the time and attendance reports for all
individuals reimbursed under a grant, subgrant or contract, whether
they are employed full-time or part-time. Time and effort reports are
required for consultants.
2. Retention Period
The three-year retention period starts from the date of the
submission of the final expenditure report.
3. Maintenance
Grantees and subgrantees are expected to see that records of
different fiscal years are separately identified and maintained so that
requested information can be readily located. Grantees and subgrantees
are also obligated to protect records adequately against fire or other
damage. When records are stored away from the grantee's/subgrantee's
principal office, a written index of the location of stored records
should be on hand, and ready access should be assured.
4. Access
Grantees and subgrantees must give any authorized representative of
the Institute access to and the right to examine all records, books,
papers, and documents related to an Institute grant.
G. Project-Related Income
Records of the receipt and disposition of project-related income
must be maintained by the grantee in the same manner as required for
the project funds that gave rise to the income and must be reported to
the Institute. (See section IX.H.2. below.) The policies governing the
disposition of the various types of project-related income are listed
below.
1. Interest
A State and any agency or instrumentality of a State, including
institutions of higher education and hospitals, shall not be held
accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds. When
funds are awarded to subgrantees through a State, the subgrantees are
not held accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds.
Local units of government and nonprofit organizations that are grantees
must refund any interest earned. Grantees shall ensure minimum balances
in their respective grant cash accounts.
2. Royalties
The grantee/subgrantee may retain all royalties received from
copyrights or other works developed under projects or from patents and
inventions, unless the terms and conditions of the grant provide
otherwise.
3. Registration and Tuition Fees
Registration and tuition fees may be considered as cash match with
the prior written approval of the Institute. Estimates of registration
and tuition fees, and any expenses to be offset by the fees, should be
included in the application budget forms and narrative.
4. Income From the Sale of Grant Products
If the sale of products occurs during the project period, the
income may be treated as cash match with the prior written approval of
the Institute. The costs and income generated by the sales must be
reported on the Quarterly Financial Status Reports and documented in an
auditable manner. Whenever possible, the intent to sell a product
should be disclosed in the application or reported to the Institute in
writing once a decision to sell products has been made. The grantee
must request approval to recover its product development, reproduction,
and dissemination costs as specified in section VIII.A.11.b.
5. Other
Other project income shall be treated in accordance with
disposition instructions set forth in the grant's terms and conditions.
H. Payments and Financial Reporting Requirements
1. Payment of Grant Funds
The procedures and regulations set forth below are applicable to
all Institute grant funds and grantees.
a. Request for Advance or Reimbursement of Funds. Grantees will
receive funds on a ``check-issued'' basis. Upon receipt, review, and
approval of a Request for Advance or Reimbursement by the Institute, a
check will be issued directly to the grantee or its designated fiscal
agent. A request must be limited to the grantee's immediate cash needs.
The Request for Advance or Reimbursement, along with the instructions
for its preparation, will be included in the official Institute award
package.
b. Continuation Awards. For purposes of submitting Requests for
Advance or Reimbursement, recipients of continuation grants should
treat each grant as a new project and number the requests accordingly
(i.e., on a grant rather than a project basis). For example, the first
request for payment from a continuation grant would be
[[Page 71643]]
number 1, the second number 2, etc. (See Appendix B, Answers to
Grantees' Frequently Asked Questions, for further guidance.)
c. Termination of Advance and Reimbursement Funding. When a grantee
organization receiving cash advances from the Institute:
(1) Demonstrates an unwillingness or inability to attain program or
project goals, or to establish procedures that will minimize the time
elapsing between cash advances and disbursements, or cannot adhere to
guideline requirements or special conditions;
(2) Engages in the improper award and administration of subgrants
or contracts; or
(3) is unable to submit reliable and/or timely reports; the
Institute may terminate advance financing and require the grantee
organization to finance its operations with its own working capital.
Payments to the grantee shall then be made by check to reimburse the
grantee for actual cash disbursements. In the event the grantee
continues to be deficient, the Institute may suspend reimbursement
payments until the deficiencies are corrected.
d. Principle of Minimum Cash on Hand. Grantees should request funds
based upon immediate disbursement requirements. Grantees should time
their requests to ensure that cash on hand is the minimum needed for
disbursements to be made immediately or within a few days.
2. Financial Reporting
a. General Requirements. To obtain financial information concerning
the use of funds, the Institute requires that grantees/subgrantees
submit timely reports for review.
b. Two copies of the Financial Status Report are required from all
grantees, other than scholarship recipients, for each active quarter on
a calendar-quarter basis. This report is due within 30 days after the
close of the calendar quarter. It is designed to provide financial
information relating to Institute funds, State and local matching
shares, project income, and any other sources of funds for the project,
as well as information on obligations and outlays. A copy of the
Financial Status Report, along with instructions for its preparation,
is included in each official Institute Award package. If a grantee
requests substantial payments for a project prior to the completion of
a given quarter, the Institute may request a brief summary of the
amount requested, by object class, to support the Request for Advance
or Reimbursement.
c. Additional Requirements for Continuation Grants. Grantees
receiving continuation grants should number their quarterly Financial
Status Reports on a grant rather than a project basis. For example, the
first quarterly report for a continuation grant award should be number
1, the second number 2, etc.
3. Consequences of Non-Compliance with Submission Requirement
Failure of the grantee to submit required financial and progress
reports may result in suspension or termination of grant payments.
I. Allowability of Costs
1. General
Except as may be otherwise provided in the conditions of a
particular grant, cost allowability is determined in accordance with
the principles set forth in OMB Circulars A-21, Cost Principles
Applicable to Grants and Contracts with Educational Institutions; A-87,
Cost Principles for State and Local Governments; and A-122, Cost
Principles for Non-profit Organizations. No costs may be recovered to
liquidate obligations incurred after the approved grant period.
Circulars may be obtained from OMB by calling 202-395-3080 or visiting
the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB.
2. Costs Requiring Prior Approval
a. Pre-agreement Costs. The written prior approval of the Institute
is required for costs considered necessary but which occur prior to the
start date of the project period.
b. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase or lease only
that equipment essential to accomplishing the goals and objectives of
the project. The written prior approval of the Institute is required
when the amount of automated data processing (ADP) equipment to be
purchased or leased exceeds $10,000 or software to be purchased exceeds
$3,000.
c. Consultants. The written prior approval of the Institute is
required when the rate of compensation to be paid a consultant exceeds
$300 a day. Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more
than $900 per day.
d. 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 (5%) of the approved
original budget or the most recently approved revised budget require
prior Institute approval. See section X.A.1.
3. Travel Costs
Transportation and per diem rates must comply with the policies of
the grantee. If the grantee does not have an established written travel
policy, then travel rates must be consistent with those established by
the Institute or the Federal Government. Institute funds may not be
used to cover the transportation or per diem costs of a member of a
national organization to attend an annual or other regular meeting of
that organization.
4. Indirect Costs
These are costs of an organization that are not readily assignable
to a particular project but are necessary to the operation of the
organization and the performance of the project. The cost of operating
and maintaining facilities, depreciation, and administrative salaries
are examples of the types of costs that are usually treated as indirect
costs. Although the Institute's policy requires all costs to be
budgeted directly, it will accept indirect costs if a grantee has an
indirect cost rate approved by a Federal agency as set forth below.
However, 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 VI.A.4.k.
a. Approved Plan Available
(1) A copy of an indirect cost rate agreement or allocation plan
approved for a grantee during the preceding two years by any Federal
granting agency on the basis of allocation methods substantially in
accord with those set forth in the applicable cost circulars must be
submitted to the Institute.
(2) Where flat rates are accepted in lieu of actual indirect costs,
grantees may not also charge expenses normally included in overhead
pools, e.g., accounting services, legal services, building occupancy
and maintenance, etc., as direct costs.
b. Establishment of Indirect Cost Rates. To be reimbursed for
indirect costs, a grantee must first establish an appropriate indirect
cost rate. To do this, the grantee must prepare an indirect cost rate
proposal and submit it to the Institute within three months after the
start of the grant period to assure recovery of the full amount of
allowable indirect costs. The rate must be developed in accordance with
principles and procedures appropriate to the type of grantee
institution
[[Page 71644]]
involved as specified in the applicable OMB Circular.
c. No Approved Plan. If an indirect cost proposal for recovery of
indirect costs is not submitted to the Institute within three months
after the start of the grant period, indirect costs will be irrevocably
disallowed for all months prior to the month that the indirect cost
proposal is received.
J. Procurement and Property Management Standards
1. Procurement Standards
For State and local governments, the Institute has adopted the
standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular A-102. Institutions
of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations will
be governed by the standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular
A-110.
2. Property Management Standards
The property management standards as prescribed in Attachment N of
OMB Circulars A-102 and A-110 apply to all Institute grantees and
subgrantees except as provided in section VIII.A.18. All grantees/
subgrantees are required to be prudent in the acquisition and
management of property with grant funds. If suitable property required
for the successful execution of projects is already available within
the grantee or subgrantee organization, expenditures of grant funds for
the acquisition of new property will be considered unnecessary.
K. Audit Requirements
1. Implementation
Each recipient of a Project Grant (other than a State court
receiving an information collection grant in connection with the
Solutions Project) must provide for an annual fiscal audit. This
requirement also applies to a State or local court receiving a subgrant
from the State Supreme Court. The audit may be of the entire grantee or
subgrantee organization or of the specific project funded by the
Institute. Audits conducted in accordance with the Single Audit Act of
1984 and OMB Circular A-128, or OMB Circular A-133, will satisfy the
requirement for an annual fiscal audit. The audit must be conducted by
an independent Certified Public Accountant, or a State or local agency
authorized to audit government agencies. Grantees must send two copies
of the audit report to the Institute. Grantees that receive funds from
a Federal agency and satisfy audit requirements of the cognizant
Federal agency must submit two copies of the audit report prepared for
that Federal agency to the Institute in order to satisfy the provisions
of this section.
2. Resolution and Clearance of Audit Reports
Timely action on recommendations by responsible management
officials is an integral part of the effectiveness of an audit. Each
grantee must have policies and procedures for acting on audit
recommendations by designating officials responsible for: Follow-up;
maintaining a record of the actions taken on recommendations and time
schedules; responding to and acting on audit recommendations; and
submitting periodic reports to the Institute on recommendations and
actions taken.
3. Consequences of Non-Resolution of Audit Issues
Ordinarily, the Institute will not make a new grant award to an
applicant that has an unresolved audit report involving Institute
awards. Failure of the grantee to resolve audit questions may also
result in the suspension or termination of payments for active
Institute grants to that organization.
L. Close-Out of Grants
1. Grantee Close-Out Requirements
Within 90 days after the end date of the grant or any approved
extension thereof (see section IX.L.2. below), the following documents
must be submitted to the Institute by grantees (other than scholarship
recipients):
a. Financial Status Report. The final report of expenditures must
have no unliquidated obligations and must indicate the exact balance of
unobligated funds. Any unobligated/unexpended funds will be deobligated
from the award by the Institute. Final payment requests for obligations
incurred during the award period must be submitted to the Institute
prior to the end of the 90-day close-out period. Grantees on a check-
issued basis, who have drawn down funds in excess of their obligations/
expenditures, must return any unused funds as soon as it is determined
that the funds are not required. In no case should any unused funds
remain with the grantee beyond the submission date of the final
Financial Status Report.
b. Final Progress Report. This report should describe the project
activities during the final calendar quarter of the project and the
close-out period, including to whom project products have been
disseminated; provide a summary of activities during the entire
project; specify whether all the objectives set forth in the approved
application or an approved adjustment have been met and, if any of the
objectives have not been met, explain why not; and discuss what, if
anything, could have been done differently that might have enhanced the
impact of the project or improved its operation.
These reporting requirements apply at the conclusion of every grant
other than a scholarship, even when the project will continue under a
continuation grant.
2. Extension of Close-Out Period
Upon the written request of the grantee, the Institute may extend
the close-out period to assure completion of the grantee's close-out
requirements. Requests for an extension must be submitted at least 14
days before the end of the close-out period and must explain why the
extension is necessary and what steps will be taken to assure that all
the grantee's responsibilities will be met by the end of the extension
period.
X. Grant Adjustments
All requests for programmatic or budgetary adjustments requiring
Institute approval must be submitted by the project director in a
timely manner (ordinarily 30 days prior to the implementation of the
adjustment being requested). All requests for changes from the approved
application will be carefully reviewed for both consistency with this
Guideline and the enhancement of grant goals and objectives.
A. Grant Adjustments Requiring Prior Written Approval
There are several types of grant adjustments that require the prior
written approval of the Institute. Examples of these adjustments
include:
1. Budget revisions among direct cost categories that (a) transfer
grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (b) individually or
cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) of the approved original budget
or the most recently approved revised budget. See section IX.I.2.d.
For continuation grants, funds from the original award may be used
during the new grant period and funds awarded through a continuation
grant may be used to cover project-related expenditures incurred during
the original award period, with the prior written approval of the
Institute.
2. A change in the scope of work to be performed or the objectives
of the project (see D. below in this section).
3. A change in the project site.
4. A change in the project period, such as an extension of the
grant period
[[Page 71645]]
and/or extension of the final financial or progress report deadline
(see E. below).
5. Satisfaction of special conditions, if required.
6. A change in or temporary absence of the project director (see F.
and G. below).
7. The assignment of an employee or consultant to a key staff
position whose qualifications were not described in the application, or
a change of a person assigned to a key project staff position (see
section VIII.A.2.).
8. A change in or temporary absence of the person responsible for
managing and reporting on the grant's finances.
9. A change in the name of the grantee organization.
10. A transfer or contracting out of grant-supported activities
(see H. below).
11. A transfer of the grant to another recipient.
12. Preagreement costs (see section IX.I.2.a.).
13. The purchase of automated data processing equipment and
software (see section IX.I.2.b.).
14. Consultant rates (see section IX.I.2.c.).
15. A change in the nature or number of the products to be prepared
or the manner in which a product would be distributed.
B. Requests for Grant Adjustments
All grantees must promptly notify their SJI program managers, in
writing, of events or proposed changes that may require adjustments to
the approved project design. In requesting an adjustment, the grantee
must set forth the reasons and basis for the proposed adjustment and
any other information the program manager determines would help the
Institute's review.
C. Notification of Approval/Disapproval
If the request is approved, the grantee will be sent a Grant
Adjustment signed by the Executive Director or his designee. If the
request is denied, the grantee will be sent a written explanation of
the reasons for the denial.
D. Changes in the Scope of the Grant
Major changes in scope, duration, training methodology, or other
significant areas must be approved in advance by the Institute. A
grantee may make minor changes in methodology, approach, or other
aspects of the grant to expedite achievement of the grant's objectives
with subsequent notification of the SJI program manager.
E. Date Changes
A request to change or extend the grant period must be made at
least 30 days in advance of the end date of the grant. A revised task
plan should accompany a request for a no-cost extension of the grant
period, along with a revised budget if shifts among budget categories
will be needed. A request to change or extend the deadline for the
final financial report or final progress report must be made at least
14 days in advance of the report deadline (see section IX.L.2.).
F. Temporary Absence of the Project Director
Whenever an absence of the project director is expected to exceed a
continuous period of one month, the plans for the conduct of the
project director's duties during such absence must be approved in
advance by the Institute. This information must be provided in a letter
signed by an authorized representative of the grantee/subgrantee at
least 30 days before the departure of the project director, or as soon
as it is known that the project director will be absent. The grant may
be terminated if arrangements are not approved in advance by the
Institute.
G. Withdrawal of/Change in Project Director
If the project director relinquishes or expects to relinquish
active direction of the project, the Institute must be notified
immediately. In such cases, if the grantee/subgrantee wishes to
terminate the project, the Institute will forward procedural
instructions upon notification of such intent. If the grantee wishes to
continue the project under the direction of another individual, a
statement of the candidate's qualifications should be sent to the
Institute for review and approval. The grant may be terminated if the
qualifications of the proposed individual are not approved in advance
by the Institute.
H. Transferring or Contracting Out of Grant-Supported Activities
No principal activity of a grant-supported project may be
transferred or contracted out to another organization without specific
prior approval by the Institute. All such arrangements must be
formalized in a contract or other written agreement between the parties
involved. Copies of the proposed contract or agreement must be
submitted for prior approval of the Institute at the earliest possible
time. The contract or agreement must state, at a minimum, the
activities to be performed, the time schedule, the policies and
procedures to be followed, the dollar limitation of the agreement, and
the cost principles to be followed in determining what costs, both
direct and indirect, will be allowed. The contract or other written
agreement must not affect the grantee's overall responsibility for the
direction of the project and accountability to the Institute.
State Justice Institute Board of Directors
Robert A. Miller, Chairman, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of
South Dakota, Pierre, SD.
Joseph F. Baca, Vice-Chairman, Justice (ret.), New Mexico Supreme
Court, Santa Fe, NM.
Sandra A. O'Connor, Secretary, States Attorney of Baltimore County,
Towson, MD.
Keith McNamara, Esq., Executive Committee Member, McNamara &
McNamara, Columbus, OH.
Terrence B. Adamson, Esq., Executive Vice-President, The National
Geographic Society, Washington, DC.
Robert N. Baldwin, State Court Administrator, Supreme Court of
Virginia, Richmond, VA.
Carlos R. Garza, Esq., Administrative Judge (ret.), Round Rock, TX.
Sophia H. Hall, Administrative Presiding Judge, Circuit Court of
Cook County, Chicago, IL.
Tommy Jewell, Presiding Children's Court Judge, Albuquerque, NM.
Arthur A. McGiverin, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of Iowa,
Ottumwa, IA.
Florence K. Murray, Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of Rhode Island,
Providence, RI.
David I. Tevelin, Executive Director (ex officio).
David I. Tevelin, Executive Director.
Appendix A--Recommendations to Grant Writers
Over the past 15 years, the Institute staff has reviewed
approximately 1,750 applications. On the basis of those reviews,
inquiries from applicants, and the views of the Board, the Institute
offers the following recommendations to help potential applicants
present workable, understandable proposals that can meet the funding
criteria set forth in this Guideline.
The Institute suggests that applicants make certain that they
address the questions and issues set forth below when preparing an
application. Applications should, however, be presented in the
format specified in section VI. of the Guideline.
1. What Is the Subject or Problem You Wish To Address?
Describe the subject or problem and how it affects the courts
and the public. Discuss how your approach will improve the situation
or advance the state of the art or knowledge, and explain why it is
the most appropriate approach to take. When statistics or research
findings are cited to support a statement or position, the source of
the citation should be referenced in a footnote or a reference list.
[[Page 71646]]
2. What Do You Want To Do?
Explain the goal(s) of the project in simple, straightforward
terms. The goals should describe the intended consequences or
expected overall effect of the proposed project (e.g., to enable
judges to sentence drug-abusing offenders more effectively, or to
dispose of civil cases within 24 months), rather than the tasks or
activities to be conducted (e.g., hold 3 training sessions, or
install a new computer system).
To the greatest extent possible, an applicant should avoid a
specialized vocabulary that is not readily understood by the general
public. Technical jargon does not enhance a paper, nor does a clever
but uninformative title.
3. How Will You Do It?
Describe the methodology carefully so that what you propose to
do and how you would do it are clear. All proposed tasks should be
set forth so that a reviewer can see a logical progression of tasks,
and relate those tasks directly to the accomplishment of the
project's goal(s). When in doubt about whether to provide a more
detailed explanation or to assume a particular level of knowledge or
expertise on the part of the reviewers, provide the additional
information. A description of project tasks also will help identify
necessary budget items. All staff positions and project costs should
relate directly to the tasks described. The Institute encourages
applicants to attach letters of cooperation and support from the
courts and related agencies that will be involved in or directly
affected by the proposed project.
4. How Will You Know It Works?
Include an evaluation component that will determine whether the
proposed training, procedure, service, or technology accomplished
the objectives it was designed to meet. Applications should present
the criteria that will be used to evaluate the project's
effectiveness; identify program elements that will require further
modification; and describe how the evaluation will be conducted,
when it will occur during the project period, who will conduct it,
and what specific measures will be used. In most instances, the
evaluation should be conducted by persons not connected with the
implementation of the procedure, training, service, or technique, or
the administration of the project.
The Institute has also prepared a more thorough list of
recommendations to grant writers regarding the development of
project evaluation plans. Those recommendations are available from
the Institute upon request.
5. How Will Others Find Out About It?
Include a plan to disseminate the results of the training,
research, or demonstration beyond the jurisdictions and individuals
directly affected by the project. The plan should identify the
specific methods which will be used to inform the field about the
project, such as the publication of law review or journal articles,
or the distribution of key materials. A statement that a report or
research findings ``will be made available to'' the field is not
sufficient. The specific means of distribution or dissemination as
well as the types of recipients should be identified. Reproduction
and dissemination costs are allowable budget items.
6. What Are the Specific Costs Involved?
The budget in an application should be presented clearly. Major
budget categories such as personnel, benefits, travel, supplies,
equipment, and indirect costs should be identified separately. The
components of ``Other'' or ``Miscellaneous'' items should be
specified in the application budget narrative, and should not
include set-asides for undefined contingencies.
7. What, If Any, Match Is Being Offered?
Courts and other units of State and local government (not
including publicly-supported institutions of higher education) are
required to contribute a match of at least 50 percent of the funds
requested from the Institute for a new grant. At least 20% of the
required match must be in the form of cash. All other applicants
must contribute a match of 25% to a new SJI-funded project, and at
least 10% of that match must be in the form of cash.
The match requirement works as follows: If, for example, a State
court system receives a $100,000 grant from the Institute, it must
provide a $50,000 match; at least 20% of the required match for a
new grant ($10,000 in the example) must be in the form of cash
rather than in-kind support (e.g., the value of staff time
contributed to the project). If a non-profit organization receives a
$100,000 grant from SJI, it must provide a $25,000 match, and at
least 10% of that match ($2,500 in the example) must be in the form
of cash.
Cash match includes funds directly contributed to the project by
the applicant, or by other private or authorized public sources;
income generated from tuition fees or the sale of project products
during the grant period; and funds dedicated to the project by the
grantee's assumption of approved indirect costs.
Non-cash match refers to in-kind contributions by the applicant,
or other private or authorized public sources. This includes, for
example, the monetary value of time contributed by existing
personnel or members of an advisory committee (but not the time
spent by participants in an educational program attending program
sessions). The nature of the match (cash or in-kind) should be
explained, and the tasks and line items for which costs will be
covered wholly or in part by match should be specified.
The Institute may waive the match and cash match requirements in
certain circumstances. See section VIII.A.8.c.
8. Which of the Two Budget Forms Should Be Used?
Section VI.A.1.c. of the SJI Grant Guideline encourages use of
the spreadsheet format of Form C1 if the application requests
$100,000 or more. Form C1 also works well for projects with discrete
tasks, regardless of the dollar value of the project. Form C, the
tabular format, is preferred for projects lacking a number of
discrete tasks, or for projects requiring less than $100,000 of
Institute funding. Generally, use the form that best lends itself to
representing most accurately the budget estimates for the project.
9. How Much Detail Should Be Included in the Budget Narrative?
The budget narrative of an application should provide the basis
for computing all project-related costs, as indicated in section
VI.A.4. of the Guideline. To avoid common shortcomings of
application budget narratives, applicants should include the
following information:
Personnel estimates that accurately provide the amount of time
to be spent by personnel involved with the project and the total
associated costs, including current salaries for the designated
personnel (e.g., Project Director, 50% for one year, annual salary
of $50,000 = $25,000). If salary costs are computed using an hourly
or daily rate, the annual salary and number of hours or days in a
work-year should be shown.
Estimates for supplies and expenses supported by a complete
description of the supplies to be used, the nature and extent of
printing to be done, anticipated telephone charges, and other common
expenditures, with the basis for computing the estimates included
(e.g., 100 reports x 75 pages each x .05/page = $375.00). Supply and
expense estimates offered simply as ``based on experience'' are not
sufficient.
In order to expedite Institute review of the budget, make a
final comparison of the amounts listed in the budget narrative with
those listed on the budget form. In the rush to complete all parts
of the application on time, there may be many last-minute changes;
unfortunately, when there are discrepancies between the budget
narrative and the budget form or the amount listed on the
application cover sheet, it is not possible for the Institute to
verify the amount of the request. A final check of the numbers on
the form against those in the narrative will preclude such
confusion.
10. What Travel Regulations Apply to the Budget Estimates?
Transportation costs and per diem rates must comply with the
policies of the applicant organization, and a copy of the
applicant's travel policy should be submitted as an appendix to the
application. If the applicant does not have a travel policy
established in writing, 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 state which policies apply to the project.
The budget narrative also should include the estimated fare, the
number of persons traveling, the number of trips to be taken, and
the length of stay. The estimated costs of travel, lodging, ground
transportation, and other subsistence should be listed and explained
separately. It is preferable for the budget to be based on the
actual costs of traveling to and from the project or meeting sites.
If the points of origin or destination are not known at the time the
budget is prepared, an average airfare may be used to estimate the
travel costs. For example, if it is anticipated that a project
advisory committee will include members from around the
[[Page 71647]]
country, a reasonable airfare from a central point to the meeting
site, or the average of airfares from each coast to the meeting
site, may be used. Applicants should arrange travel so as to be able
to take advantage of advanced-purchase price discounts whenever
possible.
11. May Grant Funds Be Used To Purchase Equipment?
Generally, grant funds may be used to purchase only the
equipment that is necessary to demonstrate a new technological
application in a court, or that is otherwise essential to
accomplishing the objectives of the project. The budget narrative
must list the equipment to be purchased and explain why the
equipment is necessary to the success of the project. The
Institute's written prior approval is required when the amount of
computer hardware to be purchased or leased exceeds $10,000, or the
software to be purchased exceeds $3,000.
12. To What Extent May Indirect Costs Be Included in the Budget
Estimates?
If an indirect cost rate has been approved by a Federal agency
within the last two years, an indirect cost recovery estimate may be
included in the budget. 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. A copy of the approved indirect cost rate
agreement should be submitted as an appendix to the application.
If an applicant does not have an approved rate agreement and
cannot budget directly for all costs, an indirect cost rate proposal
should be prepared in accordance with section IX.I.4. of the
Guideline, based on the applicant's audited financial statements for
the prior fiscal year. (Applicants lacking an aud it should budget
all project costs directly.)
13. What Meeting Costs May Be Covered With Grant Funds?
SJI grant funds may cover the reasonable cost of meeting rooms,
necessary audio-visual equipment, meeting supplies, and working
meals.
14. Does the Budget Truly Reflect All Costs Required To Complete
the Project?
After preparing the program narrative portion of the
application, applicants may find it helpful to list all the major
tasks or activities required by the proposed project, including the
preparation of products, and note the individual expenses, including
personnel time, related to each. This will help to ensure that, for
all tasks described in the application (e.g., development of a
videotape, research site visits, distribution of a final report),
the related costs appear in the budget and are explained correctly
in the budget narrative.
Appendix B--Answers to Grantees' Frequently Asked Questions
The Institute's staff works with grantees to help assure the
smooth operation of the project and compliance with the Guideline.
On the basis of monitoring more than 1,500 grants, the Institute
staff offers the following suggestions to aid grantees in meeting
the administrative and substantive requirements of their grants.
1. After the Grant Has Been Awarded, When Are the First Quarterly
Reports Due?
Quarterly Progress Reports and Financial Status Reports must be
submitted within 30 days after the end of every calendar quarter--
i.e., no later than January 30, April 30, July 30, and October 30--
regardless of the project's start date. The reporting periods
covered by each quarterly report end 30 days before the respective
deadline for the report. When an award period begins December 1, for
example, the first quarterly progress report describing project
activities between December 1 and December 31 will be due on January
30. A Financial Status Report should be submitted even if funds have
not been obligated or expended.
By documenting what has happened over the past three months,
quarterly progress reports provide an opportunity for project staff
and Institute staff to resolve any questions before they become
problems, and make any necessary changes in the project time
schedule, budget allocations, etc. The quarterly progress report
should describe project activities, their relationship to the
approved timeline, and any problems encountered and how they were
resolved, and outline the tasks scheduled for the coming quarter. It
is helpful to attach copies of relevant memos, draft products, or
other requested information. An original and one copy of a quarterly
progress report and attachments should be submitted to the
Institute.
Additional quarterly progress report or Financial Status Report
forms may be obtained from the grantee's Program Manager at SJI, or
photocopies may be made from the supply received with the award.
2. Do Reporting Requirements Differ for Continuation Grants?
Recipients of continuation grants are required to submit
quarterly progress and Financial Status Reports on the same schedule
and with the same information as recipients of grants for single new
projects.
A continuation grant should be considered as a separate phase of
the project. The reports should be numbered on a grant rather than
project basis. Thus, the first quarterly report filed under a
continuation grant should be designated as number one, the second as
number two, and so on, through the final progress and Financial
Status Reports due within 90 days after the end of the grant period.
3. What Information About Project Activities Should Be Communicated
to SJI?
In general, grantees should provide prior notice of critical
project events such as advisory board meetings or training sessions
so that the Institute Program Manager can attend, if possible. If
methodological, schedule, staff, budget allocations, or other
significant changes become necessary, the grantee should contact the
Program Manager prior to implementing any of these changes, so that
possible questions may be addressed in advance. Questions concerning
the financial requirements, quarterly financial reporting, or
payment requests should be addressed to the Institute's Grants
Financial Manager listed in the award letter.
It is helpful to include the grant number assigned to the award
on all correspondence to the Institute.
4. Why Are Special Conditions Attached to the Award Document?
Special conditions may be imposed to establish a schedule for
reporting certain key information, assure that the Institute has an
opportunity to offer suggestions at critical stages of the project,
and provide reminders of pertinent Guideline requirements.
Accordingly, it is important for grantees to check the special
conditions carefully and discuss with their Program Managers any
questions or problems they may have with the conditions. Most
concerns about timing, response time, and the level of detail
required can be resolved in advance through a telephone
conversation. The Institute's primary concern is to work with
grantees to assure that their projects accomplish their objectives,
not to enforce rigid bureaucratic requirements. However, if a
grantee fails to comply with a special condition or with other grant
requirements, the Institute may, after proper notice, suspend
payment of grant funds or terminate the grant.
Sections VIII., IX., and X. of the Grant Guideline contain the
Institute's administrative and financial requirements. Institute
Finance Division staff are always available to answer questions and
provide assistance regarding these provisions.
5. What Is a Grant Adjustment?
A Grant Adjustment is the Institute's form for acknowledging the
satisfaction of special conditions, or approving changes in grant
activities, schedule, staffing, sites, or budget allocations
requested by the project director. It also may be used to correct
errors in grant documents or deobligate funds from the grant.
6. What Schedule Should Be Followed in Submitting Requests for
Reimbursements or Advance Payments?
Requests for reimbursements or advance payments may be made at
any time after the project start date and before the end of the 90-
day close-out period. However, the Institute follows the U.S.
Treasury's policy limiting advances to the minimum amount required
to meet immediate cash needs. Given normal processing time, grantees
should not seek to draw down funds for periods greater than 30 days
from the date of the request.
7. Do Procedures for Submitting Requests for Reimbursement or
Advance Payment Differ for Continuation Grants?
The basic procedures are the same for any grant. A continuation
grant should be considered as a separate phase of the project.
Payment requests should be numbered on a grant rather than a project
basis. The first request for funds from a continuation grant should
be designated as number one, the
[[Page 71648]]
second as number two, and so on through the final payment request
for that grant.
8. If Things Change During the Grant Period, Can Funds Be
Reallocated From One Budget Category to Another?
The Institute recognizes that some flexibility is required in
implementing a project design and budget. Thus, grantees may shift
funds among direct cost budget categories. When any one reallocation
or the cumulative total of reallocations is expected to allocate
funds to a previously unbudgeted cost category or to exceed five
percent (5%) of the approved project budget, a grantee must specify
the proposed changes, explain the reasons for the changes, and
request prior Institute approval.
The same standard applies to continuation grants. In addition,
prior written Institute approval is required to shift leftover funds
from the original award to cover activities to be conducted under
the continuation award, or to use continuation grant monies to cover
costs incurred during the original grant period.
9. What Is the 90-day Close-out Period?
Following the last day of the grant, a 90-day period is provided
to allow for all grant-related bills to be received and posted, and
grant funds drawn down to cover these expenses. No obligations of
grant funds may be incurred during this period. The last day on
which an expenditure of grant funds can be obligated is the end date
of the grant period. Similarly, the 90-day period is not intended as
an opportunity to finish and disseminate grant products. This should
occur before the end of the grant period.
During the 90 days following the end of the award period, all
monies that have been obligated should be expended. All payment
requests must be received by the end of the 90-day ``close-out-
period.'' Any unexpended monies held by the grantee that remain
after the 90-day follow-up period must be returned to the Institute.
Any funds remaining in the grant that have not been drawn down by
the grantee will be deobligated.
10. Are Funds Granted by SJI ``Federal'' Funds?
The State Justice Institute Act provides that, except for
purposes unrelated to this question, ``the Institute shall not be
considered a department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal
Government.'' 42 U.S.C.10704(c)(1). Because SJI receives
appropriations from Congress, some grantee auditors have reported
SJI grant funds as ``Other Federal Assistance.'' This classification
is acceptable to SJI but is not required.
11. If SJI Is Not a Federal Agency, Do OMB Circulars Apply With
Respect to Audits?
Unless they are inconsistent with the express provisions of the
SJI Grant Guideline, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circulars
A-110, A-21, A-87, A-88, A-102, A-122, A-128, and A-133 are
incorporated into the Grant Guideline by reference. Because the
Institute's enabling legislation specifically requires the Institute
to ``conduct, or require each recipient to provide for, an annual
fiscal audit'' (see 42 U.S.C. 10711(c)(1)), the Grant Guideline sets
forth options for grantees to comply with this statutory
requirement. (See Section IX.K.)
SJI will accept audits conducted in accordance with the Single
Audit Act of 1984 and OMB Circulars A-128 or A-133 to satisfy the
annual fiscal audit requirement. Grantees that are required to
undertake these audits in conjunction with Federal grants may
include SJI funds as part of the audit even if the receipt of SJI
funds would not require such audits. This approach gives grantees an
option to fold SJI funds into the governmental audit rather than to
undertake a separate audit to satisfy SJI's Guideline requirements.
In sum, educational and nonprofit organizations that receive
payments from the Institute that are sufficient to meet the
applicability thresholds of OMB Circular A-133 must have their
annual audit conducted in accordance with Government Auditing
Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States
rather than with generally accepted auditing standards. Grantees in
this category that receive amounts below the minimum threshold
referenced in Circular A-133 must also submit an annual audit to
SJI, but they would have the option to conduct an audit of the
entire grantee organization in accordance with generally accepted
auditing standards; include SJI funds in an audit of Federal funds
conducted in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984 and OMB
Circulars A-128 or A-133; or conduct an audit of only the SJI funds
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. (See
Guideline section IX.K.) Circulars may be obtained from OMB by
calling 202-395-3080 or visiting the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB
.
12. Does SJI Have a CFDA Number?
Auditors often request that a grantee provide the Institute's
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for guidance in
conducting an audit in accordance with Government Accounting
Standards.
Because SJI is not a Federal agency, it has not been issued such
a number, and there are no additional compliance tests to satisfy
under the Institute's audit requirements beyond those of a standard
governmental audit.
Moreover, because SJI is not a Federal agency, SJI funds should
not be aggregated with Federal funds to determine if the
applicability threshold of Circular A-133 has been reached. For
example, if in fiscal year 2001 grantee ``X'' received $10,000 in
Federal funds from a Department of Justice (DOJ) grant program and
$20,000 in grant funds from SJI, the minimum A-133 threshold would
not be met. The same distinction would preclude an auditor from
considering the additional SJI funds in determining what Federal
requirements apply to the DOJ funds.
Grantees who are required to satisfy either the Single Audit Act
or OMB Circulars A-128 or A-133, and who include SJI grant funds in
those audits, need to remember that because of its status as a
private non-profit corporation, SJI is not on routing lists of
cognizant Federal agencies. Therefore, the grantee needs to submit a
copy of the audit report prepared for such a cognizant Federal
agency directly to SJI. The Institute's audit requirements may be
found in section IX.K. of the Grant Guideline.
Appendix C--SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts
Alabama
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Timothy A. Lewis, State Law Librarian, Alabama Supreme Court
Bldg., 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, AL 36104, (334) 242-4347
Alaska
Anchorage Law Library
Ms. Cynthia S. Fellows, State Law Librarian, Alaska Court Libraries
820 W. Fourth Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501, (907) 264-0583
Arizona
State Law Library
Ms. Gladys Ann Wells, Collection Development, Research Division,
Arizona Dept. of Library, Archives and Public Records, State Law
Library 1501 W. Washington, Phoenix, AZ 85007 (602) 542-4035
Arkansas
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. James D. Gingerich, Director, Administrative Office of the
Courts, Supreme Court of Arkansas, Justice Building, Little Rock, AR
72201, (501) 682-9400
California
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. William C. Vickrey, Administrative Director of the Courts,
Administrative Office of the Courts 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San
Francisco, CA 94107, (415) 865-4200
Colorado
Supreme Court Library
Ms. Linda Gruenthal, Deputy Supreme Court Law Librarian, Colorado
State Judicial Building, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, CO 80203, (303)
864-4522
Connecticut
State Library
Ms. Denise D. Jernigan, State Librarian, Connecticut State Library
231 Capital Avenue, Hartford, CT 06106, (860) 566-2516
Delaware
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. Michael E. McLaughlin, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of
the Courts, Carvel State Office Building 820 North French Street
11th Floor, P.O. Box 8911, Wilmington, DE 19801, (302) 577-8481
District of Columbia
Executive Office, District of Columbia Courts
Ms. Anne B. Wicks, Executive Officer, District of Columbia Courts
500 Indiana
[[Page 71649]]
Avenue, NW., Suite 1500, Washington, D.C. 20001, (202) 879-1700
Florida
Administrative Office of the Courts
Ms. Dee Beranek, Deputy State Courts Administrator, Florida Supreme
Court Building, 500 South Duval Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900,
(850) 922-5081
Georgia
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. David Ratley, Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, 47
Trinity Avenue, Suite 414, Atlanta, GA 30334, (404) 656-5171
Hawaii
Supreme Court Library
Ms. Ann Koto, State Law Librarian, The Supreme Court Law Library,
417 South King St., Room 119, Honolulu, HI 96813, (808) 539-4965
Idaho
AOC Judicial Education Library/State Law Library
Ms. Beth Peterson, State Law Librarian, Idaho State Law Library,
Supreme Court Building, 451 West State St., Boise, ID 83720, (208)
334-3316
Illinois
Supreme Court Library
Ms. Brenda Larison, Supreme Court of Illinois Library, 200 East
Capitol Avenue, Springfield, IL 62701-1791, (217) 782-2425
Indiana
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Dennis Lager, Supreme Court Librarian, Supreme Court Library,
State House, Room 316, Indianapolis, IN 46204, (317) 232-2557
Iowa
Administrative Office of the Court
Dr. Jerry K. Beatty, Executive Director, Judicial Education &
Planning, Office of the State Court Administrator, State Capital
Building, Des Moines, IA 50319-0001, (515) 281-8279
Kansas
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Fred Knecht, Law Librarian, Kansas Supreme Court Library, 301
West 10th Street, Topeka, KS 66612, (913) 296-3257
Kentucky
State Law Library
Ms. Marge Jones, State Law Librarian, State Law Library, State
Capital, Room 200-A, Frankfort, KY 40601, (502) 564-4848
Louisiana
State Law Library
Ms. Carol Billings, Director, Louisiana Law Library, 301 Loyola
Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70112, (504) 568-5705
Maine
State Law and Legislative Reference Library
Ms. Lynn E. Randall, State Law Librarian, 43 State House Station,
Augusta, ME 04333, (207) 287-1600
Maryland
State Law Library
Mr. Michael S. Miller, Director, Maryland State Law Library, Court
of Appeal Building, 361 Rowe Boulevard, Annapolis, MD 21401, (410)
260-1430
Massachusetts
Middlesex Law Library
Ms. Sandra Lindheimer, Librarian , Middlesex Law Library, Superior
Court House, 40 Thorndike Street, Cambridge, MA 02141, (617) 494-
4148
Michigan
Michigan Judicial Institute
Dawn F. McCarty, Interim Director, Michigan Judicial Institute, 222
Washington Square North, P.O. Box 30205, Lansing, MI 48909, (517)
334-7805
Minnesota
State Law Library (Minnesota Judicial Center)
Mr. Marvin R. Anderson, State Law Librarian, Supreme Court of
Minnesota, 25 Constitution Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55155, (612) 297-
2084
Mississippi
Mississippi Judicial College
Mr. Leslie Johnson, Director, University of Mississippi, P.O. Box
8850, University, MS 38677, (601) 232-5955
Montana
State Law Library
Ms. Judith Meadows, State Law Librarian, State Law Library of
Montana, 215 North Sanders, Helena, MT 59620, (406) 444-3660
Nebraska
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. Joseph C. Steele, State Court Administrator, Administrative
Office of the Courts/Probation, State Capitol Building, Room 1220,
Post Office Box 98910, Lincoln, NE 68509-8910, (402) 471-3730
Nevada
National Judicial College
Mr. Randall Snyder, Law Librarian, National Judicial College ,
Judicial College Building, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89550,
(775) 784-6747
New Hampshire
New Hampshire Law Library
Ms. Christine Swan, Law Librarian, New Hampshire Law Library,
Supreme Court Building, One Noble Drive, Concord, NH 03301-6160,
(603) 271-3777
New Jersey
New Jersey State Library
Ms. Marjorie Garwig, Supervising Law Librarian, New Jersey State Law
Library, 185 West State Street, P.O. Box 520, Trenton, NJ 08625-
0250, (609) 292-6230
New Mexico
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Thaddeus Bejnar, Librarian, Supreme Court Library, Post Office
Drawer L, Santa Fe, NM 87504, (505) 827-4850
New York
Supreme Court Library
Ms. Barbara Briggs, Principal Law Librarian, New York State Supreme
Court Law Library, Onondaga County Court House, 401 Montgomery
Street, Syracuse, NY 13202, (315) 435-2063
North Carolina
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Thomas P. Davis, Librarian, North Carolina Supreme Court
Library, P.O. Box 28006, 2 East Morgan Street, Raleigh, NC 27601,
(919) 733-3425
North Dakota
Supreme Court Library
Ms. Marcella Kramer, Assistant Law Librarian, Supreme Court Law
Library, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 182, 2nd Floor, Judicial
Wing, Bismarck, ND 58505-0540, (701) 328-2229
Northern Mariana Islands
Supreme Court of the Northern Mariana Islands
Honorable Miguel Sablan Demapan, Chief Justice, Supreme Court of the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, P.O. Box 2165 CK,
Saipan, MP 96950, (670) 236-9700
Ohio
Supreme Court Library
Mr. Paul S. Fu, Law Librarian, Supreme Court Law Library, Supreme
Court of Ohio, 30 East Broad Street, Columbus, OH 43266-0419, (614)
466-2044
Oklahoma
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. Howard W. Conyers, Administrative Director of the Courts, 1915
North Stiles, Suite 305, Oklahoma City, OK 73105, (405) 521-2450,
Oregon
Administrative Office of the Courts
Ms. Kingsley W. Click, State Court Administrator, Office of the
State Court Administrator, Supreme Court Building, Salem, OR 97310,
(503) 986-5900
Pennsylvania
State Library of Pennsylvania
Ms. Barbara Miller, Collection Management Librarian, State Library
of Pennsylvania, Room 218, Forum Building, P.O. Box 1601,
Harrisburg, PA 17105, (717) 787-5718
[[Page 71650]]
Puerto Rico
Office of Court Administration
Alfredo Rivera-Mendoza, Esq., Director, Area of Planning and
Management, Office of Court Administration, P.O. Box 917, Hato Rey,
PR 00919,
Rhode Island
Roger Williams University
Ms. Gail Winson, Director of the Library, Roger Williams University,
School of Law Library, 10 Metacom Avenue, Bristol, RI 02809
South Carolina
Coleman Karesh Law Library (University of South Carolina School of
Law)
Mr. Steve Hinckley, Library Director, Coleman Karesh Law Library,
U.S.C. Law Center, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208,
(803) 777-5944
South Dakota
State Law Library
Librarian, 500 East Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota 57501, (605) 773-
4898
Tennessee
Tennessee State Law Library
Honorable Cornelia A. Clark, Director, Administrative Office of the
Courts, Tennessee Supreme Court, 511 Union, Nashville, TN 37243-
0607, (615) 741-2687
Texas
State Law Library
Ms. Kay Schleuter, Director, State Law Library, P.O. Box 12367,
Austin, TX 78711, (512) 463-1722
U.S. Virgin Islands
Library of the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands (St. Thomas)
Librarian, The Library, Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands,
Post Office Box 70, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands 00804
Utah
Utah State Judicial Administration Library
Ms. Debbie Christiansen, Utah State Judicial Administration Library,
Administrative Office of the Courts, 450 South State, P.O. Box
140241, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-0241, (801) 533-6371
Vermont
Supreme Court of Vermont
Mr. Paul J. Donovan, Law Librarian, Department of Libraries, 109
State Street, Montpelier, VT 05609, (802) 828-3278
Virginia
Administrative Office of the Courts
Mr. Robert N. Baldwin, State Court Administrator, Supreme Court of
Virginia, 100 North Ninth Street, 3rd Floor, Richmond, VA 23219,
(804) 786-6455
Washington
Washington State Law Library
Ms. Deborah Norwood, State Law Librarian, Washington State Law
Library, Temple of Justice, P.O. Box 40751, Olympia, WA 98504-0751,
(360) 357-2136
West Virginia
Administrative Office of the Courts
Ms. Kathleen Gross, Deputy Director of Judicial Education, West
Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, State Capitol, 1900 Kanawha
Boulevard East, Building 1, Room E-100, Charleston, WV 25305, (304)
558-0145
Wisconsin
State Law Library
Ms. Jane Colwin, Director of Public Services, State Law Library 310
E. State Capitol, P.O. Box 7881, Madison, WI 53707, (608) 261-2340
Wyoming
Wyoming State Law Library
Ms. Kathleen B. Carlson, Law Librarian, Wyoming State Law Library,
Supreme Court Building 2301 Capitol Avenue, Cheyenne, WY 82002,
(307) 777-7509
National:
American Judicature Society
Ms. Clara Wells, Assistant for Information and Library Services, 180
North Michigan Avenue, 600, Chicago, IL 60601, (312) 558-
6900,
National Center for State Courts
Ms. Peggy Rogers, Acquisitions/Serials Librarian 300 Newport Avenue,
Williamsburg, VA 23187-8798, (757) 259-1857
JERITT
Dr. Maureen E. Conner, Executive Director, The JERITT Project, 1407
S. Harrison, Suite 330 Nisbet, East Lansing, MI 48823-5239, (517)
353-8603; (517) 432-3965 (fax); e-mail: connerm@msu.edu; Web site:
http://jeritt.msu.edu
Appendix D--Illustrative List of Technical Assistance Grants
The following list presents examples of the types of technical
assistance for which State and local courts can request Institute
funding. Please check with the JERITT project (517/353-8603 or
jeritt@msu.edu) for more information about these and other SJI-
supported technical assistance projects.
Application of Technology
Technology Plan (Office of the South Dakota State Court
Administrator: SJI-99-066).
Children and Families in Court
Expanded Unified Family Court (Ventura County, CA, Superior
Court: SJI-01-122).
Trial Court Performance Standards for the Unified Family Court
of Delaware (Family Court of Delaware: SJI-98-205).
Court Planning, Management, and Financing
Job Classification and Pay Study of the New Hampshire Courts
(New Hampshire Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI-98-011).
A Model for Building and Institutionalizing Judicial Branch
Strategic Planning (12th Judicial Circuit, Sarasota, FL: SJI-98-
266).
Strategic Planning (Fourth Judicial District Court, Hennepin
County, MN: SJI-99-221).
Differentiated Case Management for the Improvement of Civil Case
Processing in the Trial Courts of Texas (Texas Office of Court
Administration: SJI-99-222).
Dispute Resolution and the Courts
Evaluating the New Mexico Court of Appeals Mediation Program
(New Mexico Supreme Court: SJI-00-122).
Improving Public Confidence in the Courts
Mississippi Task Force on Gender Fairness in the Courts
(Mississippi Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI-00-108).
Analysis of the Juror Debriefing Project (King County, WA,
Superior Court: SJI-00-049).
Improving the Court's Response to Family Violence
New Hampshire Fatality Reviews (New Hampshire Administrative
Office of the Courts: SJI-99-142).
Education and Training for Judges and Other Court Personnel
Iowa Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Judicial Branch
Education (Iowa State Court Administrator's Office: SJI-01-200).
Appendix E--Illustrative List of Model Curricula
The following list includes examples of model SJI-supported
curricula that State judicial educators may wish to adapt for
presentation in education programs for judges and other court
personnel with the assistance of a Judicial Branch Education
Technical Assistance Grant. Please refer to section VI.F. for
information on submitting a letter application for a Judicial Branch
Education Technical Assistance Grant. A list of all SJI-supported
education projects is available on the SJI Web site (http://www.statejustice.org
). Please also check with the JERITT project
(517/353-8603 or http://jeritt.msu.edu). and your State SJI-
designated library (see Appendix C). for more information about
these and other SJI-supported curricula that may be appropriate for
in-State adaptation.
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Judicial Settlement Manual (National Judicial College: SJI-89-
089).
Improving the Quality of Dispute Resolution (Ohio State
University College of Law: SJI-93-277).
Comprehensive ADR Curriculum for Judges (American Bar
Association: SJI-95-002).
Domestic Violence and Custody Mediation (American Bar
Association: SJI-96-038).
[[Page 71651]]
Court Coordination
Bankruptcy Issues for State Trial Court Judges (American
Bankruptcy Institute: SJI-91-027).
Intermediate Sanctions Handbook: Experiences and Tools for
Policymakers (Center for Effective Public Policy: IAA-88-NIC-001).
Regional Conference Cookbook: A Practical Guide to Planning and
Presenting a Regional Conference on State-Federal Judicial
Relationships (U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit: SJI-92-
087).
Bankruptcy Issues and Domestic Relations Cases (American
Bankruptcy Institute: SJI-96-175).
Court Management
Managing Trials Effectively: A Program for State Trial Judges
(National Center for State Courts/National Judicial College: SJI-87-
066/067, SJI-89-054/055, SJI-91-025/026).
Caseflow Management Principles and Practices (Institute for
Court Management/National Center for State Courts: SJI-87-056).
A Manual for Workshops on Processing Felony Dispositions in
Limited Jurisdiction Courts (National Center for State Courts: SJI-
90-052).
Managerial Budgeting in the Courts; Performance Appraisal in the
Courts; Managing Change in the Courts; Court Automation Design; Case
Management for Trial Judges; Trial Court Performance Standards
(Institute for Court Management/National Center for State Courts:
SJI-91-043).
Strengthening Rural Courts of Limited Jurisdiction and Team
Training for Judges and Clerks (Rural Justice Center: SJI-90-014,
SJI-91-082).
Interbranch Relations Workshop (Ohio Judicial Conference: SJI-
92-079).
Integrating Trial Management and Caseflow Management (Justice
Management Institute: SJI-93-214).
Leading Organizational Change (California Administrative Office
of the Courts: SJI-94-068).
Privacy Issues in Computerized Court Record Keeping: An
Instructional Guide for Judges and Judicial Educators (National
Judicial College: SJI-94-015).
Managing Mass Tort Cases (National Judicial College: SJI-94-
141).
Employment Responsibilities of State Court Judges (National
Judicial College: SJI-95-025).
Caseflow Management; Resources, Budget, and Finance; Visioning
and Strategic Planning; Leadership; Purposes and Responsibilities of
Courts; Information Management Technology; Human Resources
Management; Education, Training, and Development; Public Information
and the Media from ``NACM Core Competency Curriculum Guidelines''
(National Association for Court Management: SJI-96-148).
Dealing with the Common Law Courts: A Model Curriculum for
Judges and Court Staff (Institute for Court Management/ National
Center for State Courts: SJI-96-159).
Caseflow Management from ``Innovative Educational Programs for
Judges and Court Managers'' (Justice Management Institute: SJI-98-
041).
Courts and Communities
Reporting on the Courts and the Law (American Judicature
Society: SJI-88-014).
Victim Rights and the Judiciary: A Training and Implementation
Project (National Organization for Victim Assistance: SJI-89-083).
National Guardianship Monitoring Project: Trainer and Trainee's
Manual (American Association of Retired Persons: SJI-91-013).
Access to Justice: The Impartial Jury and the Justice System and
When Implementing the Court-Related Needs of Older People and
Persons with Disabilities: An Instructional Guide (National Judicial
College: SJI-91-054).
You Are the Court System: A Focus on Customer Service (Alaska
Court System: SJI-94-048).
Serving the Public: A Curriculum for Court Employees (American
Judicature Society: SJI-96-040).
Courts and Their Communities: Local Planning and the Renewal of
Public Trust and Confidence: A California Statewide Conference
(California Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI-98-008).
Charting the Course of Public Trust and Confidence in Our Courts
(Mid-Atlantic Association for Court Management: SJI-98-208).
Trial Court Judicial Leadership Program: Judges and Court
Administrators Serving the Courts and Community (National Center for
State Courts: SJI-98-268).
Public Trust and Confidence (Arizona Courts Association: SJI-99-
063).
Diversity, Values, and Attitudes
Troubled Families, Troubled Judges (Brandeis University: SJI-89-
071).
The Crucial Nature of Attitudes and Values in Judicial Education
(National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: SJI-90-058).
Enhancing Diversity in the Court and Community (Institute for
Court Management/National Center for State Courts: SJI-91-043).
Cultural Diversity Awareness in Nebraska Courts from Native
American Alternatives to Incarceration Project (Nebraska Urban
Indian Health Coalition: SJI-93-028).
Race Fairness and Cultural Awareness Faculty Development
Workshop (National Judicial College: SJI-93-063).
A Videotape Training Program in Ethics and Professional Conduct
for Nonjudicial Court Personnel and The Ethics Fieldbook: Tool For
Trainers (American Judicature Society: SJI-93-068).
Court Interpreter Training Course for Spanish Interpreters
(International Institute of Buffalo: SJI-93-075).
Doing Justice: Improving Equality Before the Law Through
Literature-Based Seminars for Judges and Court Personnel (Brandeis
University: SJI-94-019).
Multi-Cultural Training for Judges and Court Personnel (St.
Petersburg Junior College: SJI-95-006).
Ethical Standards for Judicial Settlement: Developing a Judicial
Education Module (American Judicature Society: SJI-95-082).
Code of Ethics for the Court Employees of California (California
Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI 95-245).
Workplace Sexual Harassment Awareness and Prevention (California
Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI 96-089).
Just Us On Justice: A Dialogue on Diversity Issues Facing
Virginia Courts (Virginia Supreme Court: SJI-96-150).
When Bias Compounds: Insuring Equal Treatment for Women of Color
in the Courts (National Judicial Education Program: SJI 96-161).
When Judges Speak Up: Ethics, the Public, and the Media
(American Judicature Society: SJI-96-152).
Family Violence and Gender-Related Violent Crime
National Judicial Response to Domestic Violence: Civil and
Criminal Curricula (Family Violence Prevention Fund: SJI-87-061,
SJI-89-070, SJI-91-055).
Domestic Violence: A Curriculum for Rural Courts (Rural Justice
Center: SJI-88-081).
Judicial Training Materials on Spousal Support; Judicial
Training Materials on Child Custody and Visitation (Women Judges'
Fund for Justice: SJI-89-062).
Understanding Sexual Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger
and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault (National Judicial Education
Program: SJI-92-003, SJI-98-133 [video curriculum]).
Domestic Violence & Children: Resolving Custody and Visitation
Disputes (Family Violence Prevention Fund: SJI-93-255).
Adjudicating Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse When Custody Is
In Dispute (National Judicial Education Program: SJI 95-019).
Handling Cases of Elder Abuse: Interdisciplinary Curricula for
Judges and Court Staff (American Bar Association: SJI-93-274).
Health and Science
Environmental Law Resource Handbook (University of New Mexico
Institute for Public Law: SJI-92-162).
A Judge's Deskbook on the Basic Philosophies and Methods of
Science: Model Curriculum (University of Nevada, Reno: SJI-97-030).
Judicial Education for Appellate Court Judges
Career Writing Program for Appellate Judges (American Academy of
Judicial Education: SJI-88-086).
Civil and Criminal Procedural Innovations for Appellate Courts.
(National Center for State Courts: SJI-94-002).
Judicial Branch Education: Faculty and Program Development
The Leadership Institute in Judicial Education and The Advanced
Leadership Institute in Judicial Education (University of Memphis:
SJI-91-021).
Faculty Development Instructional Program'' from Curriculum
Review (National Judicial College: SJI-91-039).
Resource Manual and Training for Judicial Education Mentors
(National Association of State Judicial Educators: SJI-95-233).
Institute for Faculty Excellence in Judicial Education (National
Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: SJI-96-042; University
of Memphis: SJI-01-202).
[[Page 71652]]
Orientation, Mentoring, and Continuing Professional Education of Judges
and Court Personnel
Legal Institute for Special and Limited Jurisdiction Judges
(National Judicial College: SJI-89-043, SJI-91-040).
Pre-Bench Training for New Judges (American Judicature Society:
SJI-90-028).
A Unified Orientation and Mentoring Program for New Judges of
All Arizona Trial Courts (Arizona Supreme Court: SJI-90-078).
Court Organization and Structure (Institute for Court
Management/National Center for State Courts: SJI-91-043).
Judicial Review of Administrative Agency Decisions (National
Judicial College: SJI-91-080).
New Employee Orientation Facilitators Guide (Minnesota Supreme
Court: SJI-92-155).
Magistrates Correspondence Course (Alaska Court System: SJI-92-
156).
Computer-Assisted Instruction for Court Employees (Utah
Administrative Office of the Courts: SJI-94-012).
Bench Trial Skills and Demeanor: An Interactive Manual (National
Judicial College: SJI 94-058).
Ethical Issues in the Election of Judges (National Judicial
College: SJI-94-142).
Caseflow Management; Resources, Budget, and Finance; Visioning
and Strategic Planning; Leadership; Purposes and Responsibilities of
Courts; Information Management Technology; Human Resources
Management; Education, Training, and Development; Public Information
and the Media from ``NACM Core Competency Curriculum Guidelines''
(National Association for Court Management: SJI-96-148).
Innovative Approaches to Improving Competencies of General
Jurisdiction Judges (National Judicial College: SJI-98-001).
Caseflow Management from ``Innovative Educational Programs for
Judges and Court Managers'' (Justice Management Institute: SJI-98-
041.
Juveniles and Families in Court
Fundamental Skills Training Curriculum for Juvenile Probation
Officers (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: SJI-
90-017).
Child Support Across State Lines: The Uniform Interstate Family
Support Act from Uniform Interstate Family Support Act: Development
and Delivery of a Judicial Training Curriculum (ABA Center on
Children and the Law: SJI 94-321).
Juvenile Justice at the Crossroads: Literature-Based Seminars
for Judges, Court Personnel, and Community Leaders (Brandeis
University: SJI-99-150).
Strategic and Futures Planning
Minding the Courts into the Twentieth Century (Michigan Judicial
Institute: SJI-89-029).
An Approach to Long-Range Strategic Planning in the Courts
(Center for Public Policy Studies: SJI-91-045).
Substance Abuse
Effective Treatment for Drug-Involved Offenders: A Review &
Synthesis for Judges and Court Personnel (Education Development
Center, Inc.: SJI-90-051).
Good Times, Bad Times: Drugs, Youth, and the Judiciary
(Professional Development and Training Center, Inc.: SJI-91-095).
Gaining Momentum: A Model Curriculum for Drug Courts (Florida
Office of the State Courts Administrator: SJI-94-291).
Judicial Response to Substance Abuse: Children, Adolescents, and
Families (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges: SJI-
95-030).
BILLING CODE 6820-SC-P
[[Page 71653]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.000
[[Page 71654]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.001
[[Page 71655]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.002
[[Page 71656]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.003
[[Page 71657]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.004
[[Page 71658]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.005
[[Page 71659]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.006
[[Page 71660]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.007
[[Page 71661]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.008
[[Page 71662]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.009
[[Page 71663]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.010
[[Page 71664]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.011
[[Page 71665]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.012
[[Page 71666]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.013
[[Page 71667]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02DE02.014
[FR Doc. 02-29993 Filed 11-29-02; 8:45 am]