Detailed Information on the
Violence Against Women Programs Assessment

Develop a comprehensive evaluation plan for the Violence Against Women Programs to obtain better information on the program's impacts.

Set more ambitious goals for program performance to ensure continuous improvement in program results.

Include performance information in budget submissions to better link resources requested to program performance goals.

Measure: Number of communities with improved capacity for a coordinated community response to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.

Explanation:

Measure: The number of grant funded multi-disciplinary training events that have occurred.

Explanation:This proposed measure reflects OVW's efforts to increase the number of trainings available to OVW grantees in order to improve their responses to domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking. OVW trainings for grantees are often limited to small numbers of participants to increase productivity and information retention. An increase in actual training events, specifically those geared toward a multi-disciplinary audience, will signify that a greater number of the CCR components are being trained. A CCR is most effective when the CCR members are knowledgable not only of their own specific function but of those of the other CCR components. The information below reflects data from the Arrest, LAV and Rural Programs.

Measure: Percent of Victims Requesting Services Who Received Them

Explanation:"Total Number of Victims Receiving Requested Services" divided by "Total Number of Victims Requesting Services"

Measure: Ratio of M&A budget to OVW program dollars

Explanation:

Measure: Number of people trained.

Explanation:For Arrest, LAV and Rural Programs

Measure: Application processing time

Explanation:

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and subsequent and related legislation, authorized formula and discretionary grant programs to respond to the cirmes of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking that are administered by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). Overall, all OVW grant programs share a common purpose to assist states, tribes, local jurisdictions, and nonprofit organizations to build their capacity to address violent crimes against women and to develop and strengthen services for victims of these crimes. OVW administers 12 grant programs (one formula and eleven discretionary programs), each having a clear and succinct purpose, as outlined in authorizing legislation and program documents such as grant solicitations. The grant progams with the most significant funding (85% of all programs) currently are: the STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grants Program (STOP Program), the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders (Arrest Program), the Legal Assistance for Victims Grant Program (LAV Program), and the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program (Rural Program). These grant programs support OVW's purpose by encouraging communities to adopt a multi-faceted approach to addressing violence against women, which is referred to as a "coordinated community response" (CCR).

Evidence: 1. The Violence Against Women Act 2005, as amended, can be found at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h3402enr.txt.pdf. 2. The FY06 STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf. 3. The FY06 LAV Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf. 4. The FY06 Arrest Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf. 5. The FY06 Rural Domestic Violence Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf. 6. OVW Strategic Plan including the OVW mission statement (Page 2).

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Congress recognized the severity of the crimes of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, and in response passed the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA 1994). The Act was reauthorized in 2000 and again in 2005 in response to the continued need to address these serious crimes. The Office on Violence Against Women's grant programs are designed specifically to build the capacity of communities to effectively respond to violent crimes against women by holding offenders accountable and keeping victims safe. In 2004, there were a half million victims of domestic violence. Over one million women are stalked each year. More than 200,000 rapes and sexual assaults occurred in 2004. One third of female homicide victims are murdered by their intimate partners. The STOP Program supports communities in their efforts to develop and strengthen effective law enforcement and prosecution strategies to combat violent crimes against women and to develop and strengthen victim services in cases involving violent crimes against women. The Arrest Program enables communities to use Federal funding to build and strengthen a coordinated community response to domestic violence involving police, prosecutors, court personnel, probation officers, and victim services providers. The LAV Program addresses the critical need for victims of domestic violence to have access to legal services that meet the wide range of needs of these victims. The Rural Program recognizes that victims of domestic violence, dating violence and child victimization living in rural jurisdictions face unique barriers to receiving assistance and additional challenges rarely encountered in urban areas.

Evidence: 1. Information about crime in the U.S., including the relationship of the victim to the offender, can be found at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm. 2. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) Crime Data Brief: Intimate Partner Violence, 1993 - 2001, can be found at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf 5. The BJS National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal Victimization, 2004 can be found at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv04.pdf 6. Center for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/ipvfacts.htm 7. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm 8. The Violence Against Women Act of 2000 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm 9. The Violence Against Women Act 2005: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h3402enr.txt.pdf. 10. The FY06 STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program Solicitation, which describes the issues the program attempts to address, can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf. 11. The FY06 LAV Program Solicitation, which describes the issues the program attempts to address, can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf. 12. The FY06 Arrest Program Solicitation, which describes the issues the program attempts to address, can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf. 13. The FY06 Rural Domestic Violence Program Solicitation, which describes the issues the program attempts to address, can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) leads the Federal effort to respond to violence against women. OVW is the sole Federal entity with a mission of eradicating violence against women through a coordinated community response that requires collaboration between the criminal and civil justice systems, victim services providers, faith and community-based programs, health programs, and other community-based services. Applicants are required to certify that the OVW funds do not supplant other State and/or local funding. Also, through its competitive grant programs, OVW requires applicants to disclose other related Federal funding that they receive for similar efforts in their budget submissions and in compliance with the OJP Financial Guide. This information is considered in making Arrest, LAV, and Rural Program funding decisions to prevent duplication. The OJP Financial Guide,which OVW follows, states that "the accounting systems of all recipients and subrecipients must ensure that agency funds are not commingled with funds from other Federal agencies. Each award must be accounted for separately. Recipients and subrecipients are prohibited from commingling funds on either a program-by-program or project-by-project basis. Funds specifically budgeted and/or received for one project may not be used to support another. Where a recipient's or subrecipient's accounting system cannot comply with this requirement, the recipient or subrecipient shall establish a system to provide adequate fund accountability for each project it has been awarded." Some of the grantees supported by OVW's programs also receive funding support from the Department of Justice's Office of Victims of Crime (OVC), through OVC's Victims Services formula grant. An informal sampling based on OMB visits to OVW grantees in two states in 2004 and 2006 found that many of the programs also were the beneficiaries of VOCA funding through OVC. While the grantees appeared to be putting both sources of funding to good use, that grantees may have to compete for two separate funding streams in order to finance their operations may constitute an unnecessary duplication of effort. These two different funding streams may these grantees' ability to serve victims. However, the grantees must bear the administrative burden of applying for and complying with different program requirements.

Evidence: 1. Each solicitation requires applicants to provide a letter of certification of non-supplanting. In the FY06 Arrest Program Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf, a sample non-supplanting certification letter can be found on page 38 and notice of the requirement can be found on pages 21 and 25. In the FY06 LAV Program Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf, a sample non-supplanting certification letter can be found on page 49 and notice of the requirement can be found on pages 20 and 23. In the FY06 STOP Program Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf, a sample non-supplanting certification letter can be found on page 27 and notice of the requirement can be found on pages 11, 16, and 19. In the FY06 Rural Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf, a sample non-supplanting certification letter can be found on page 33 and notice of the requirement can be found on pages 17 and 21. 2. OMB site visits with two OVW grantees in South Dakota, August 2004. 3. OMB site visits with several OVW grantees in New York City, Feb. 27 to Mar. 2, 2006. 4. Applicants for OVW funds are required to required to comply with the regulations and requirements outlined in the OJP Financial Guide. Part 2, Chapter 3 of the OJP Financial Guide, "Standards for Financial Management Systems," http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/FinGuide/part2chap3.htm, notifies applicants that unless otherwise prohibited by statute, applications for funding and financial reports require budget and cost estimates on the basis of total costs, which includes other Federal funding.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: The Violence Against Women grant programs are designed to reflect the statutory purpose areas and eligibility and certification requirements that the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) prescribes. In the past, when statutory requirements have inhibited program effectiveness or efficiency, the Office on Violence Against Women has achieved success in working with the Department of Justice's Office of Legislative Affairs to obtain statutory "fixes" from Congress. For example, although the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 added "dating violence" to the purpose areas of a number of the programs, grantees of the LAV program were unable to serve dating violence victims. This problem was corrected by the Justice for All Act of 2004. The overall design of the STOP formula grant program is an effective one. The program imposes comprehensive planning requirements on the states for the use of funds, as well as a certification to ensure a basic commitment to program requirements. While the program does include formula set asides for tribal areas, police, prosecutors, and non-profit victim services, the program provides some flexibility to meet the most urgent criminal justice system and victim services needs in each state. The overall design of the Arrest Program is strong. The Program's statutory certification requirements ensure that all applicants have a basic commitment to adopting effective criminal justice policies for local jurisdictions. The Program's purpose areas are sufficiently broad so that OVW can fund a range of local strategies responding to violent crimes against women. Moreover, by requiring that applicants enter memoranda of understanding with victim services providers, OVW ensures that grantee jurisdictions have formed true partnerships with victim advocates. The overall design of the LAV Program is strong. Of particular note, the LAV statute requires that grant-funded lawyers complete training on domestic violence and sexual assault, that such training meet certain standards, and that grantees coordinate with State, local or tribal domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions and law enforcement officials. These requirements ensure that the legal services truly are targeted for victims and that LAV grantees are part of a coordinated community response. The overall design of the Rural Program also is strong. With an emphasis placed on rural and underserved areas, the program helps to ensure that there is a source of grant funding available to address criminal justice system and victim service strategies in areas that might not otherwise be supported financial through other funding streams. The program's requirement that jurisdictions collaborate with non-governmental nonprofit organizations helps to ensure that resources are used to mount effective community-based responses.

Evidence: All OVW grant programs are designed to implement the grant program purpose areas mandated by statute or to fund permissible activities outlined in the statutory provisions authorizing the grant program. All OVW grant program solicitations set forth the statutory provisions authorizing the grant program, specify permissible activities that can be supported with OVW funds and, in some instances, identify activities that can not be supported with grant funds. As part of routine grant monitoring, OVW staff review semi-annual progress reports for all grantees from discretionary grant programs and annual progress reports from state administrators from the STOP Program to ensure that grant funds are being expended in an effective manner that is also consistent with the design of the grant program as determined by the VAWA statute and related legislation as amended. 1. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm. 2. The Violence Against Women Act of 2000 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm. 3. Congress recently made substantial changes to existing OVW programs in the Violence Against Women Act and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. During the legislative process, the Department of Justice worked closely with Congress to correct statutory problems that hindered OVW in the administration of its grant programs. To cite just one amendment, Congress expanded the Arrest Program so that program funds could be used to improve communities' responses to sexual assault. These changes are beyond the scope of this PART response but help explain why OVW is generally satisfied with the statutory structure of the Arrest, Campus and LAV Programs. The Violence Against Women Act 2005 can be found at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h3402enr.txt.pdf. (See 42 U.S.C. § 3796hh(c) for the Arrest Program's statutory certification requirement that ensure that all applicants have a basic commitment to adopting effective law enforcement and judicial policies. See 42 U.S.C. § 3796gg-6(d) for the LAV Program's statutory requirement that grant-funded lawyers complete training on domestic violence and sexual assault, that such training meet certain standards, and that grantees coordinate with State, local or tribal domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions and law enforcement officials).

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: Violence Against Women grant programs are designed to implement the grant program purpose areas mandated by statute or to fund permissible activities outlined in the statutory provisions authorizing the grant program. All Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) grant program solicitations set forth the statutory provisions authorizing the grant program, specify permissible activities that can be supported with OVW funds and, in some instances, identify activities that cannot be supported with grant funds. While the Arrest, LAV, and Rural programs are competitive, discretionary programs--with processes in place to ensure that activities funded reflect program purposes and priorities--the STOP Formula grants allocate funding based on population, with mandatory set-asides for specific types of subgrantees. Every state that qualifies for STOP funds must certify that grant funds " will be allocated, without duplication, as follows: not less than 25 percent to law enforcement, not less than 25 percent to prosecutors, not less than 30 percent to nonprofit, nongovernmental victim services programs (of which at least 10 percent will be distributed to culturally specific community-based organizations), and not less than 5 percent for state and local courts." The remainder of the funds may be spent at the discretion of the state or territory to address the statutory program purposes in a manner that best meets the unique needs of their own state or territory. The allocations help to ensure that the program addresses its intended purposes. While a population-based formula does not ensure that program funding is distributed to states proportionally based on the incidence of violent crimes against women, there are are no good data on the distribution of such crimes by state. The OVW solicitation for the STOP Program outlines the requirement that within 120 days of receiving an award, every state STOP administrator submit a detailed implementation plan for STOP Program funds. This requirement ensures that STOP funds address the unique needs of the different states. As described in 42 U.S.C 3796gg, states and subgrantees must develop plans for implementation and must consult and coordinate with nongovernmental victim services programs, including sexual assault and domestic violence victim services programs. Applicants cannot draw down funds until the plan has been approved by OVW.

Evidence: 1. Each year, OVW reviews and revises its solicitations to reflect the current statutory purpose areas and eligibility requirements and to ensure that OVW funds will reach the intended beneficiaries. In a clear, specific, and uniform manner, solicitations for all OVW grant programs outline eligible applicants, certification requirements, activities within the scope of the program, program priority areas and, if relevant, special conditions for funding, as well as activities that may compromise victim safety. The FY06 Arrest Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf. The FY06 LAV Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf. The FY06 STOP Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf. The FY06 Rural Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf. 2. Crime rates vary considerably by geographic area. See for example: Crime in the United States, 2004: Uniform Crime Reports, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC. (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/documents/CIUS2004.pdf). Also see for example: Crime and the Nation's Households, 2004, Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Dept. of Justice, April 2006, NCJ 211511. (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cnh04.pdf). 3. Some states have had difficulty meeting the allocation targets (at least 5% for state and local courts, at least 25% for to law enforcement, at least 25% for prosecutors, and at least 30% for nonprofit victim services providers). See for example: 2001 Report: Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women, The Urban Institute, September 2001. (http://dev.vawnet.org/Funding/STOPGrants/UI_STOP-VAWA_2001-vlib.pdf) 4. OVW provides updated peer review guidebooks each year to reflect current program priorities. For detailed information about OVW's peer review process, please see the OVW FY2006 Peer Review Guidelines manual. 5. STOP Implementation Plan.The implementation plan must describe: the process used to develop the plan and the involvement of victim services programs and advocates; reevaluation or reassessment of previous efforts; how the approach will build on efforts of previous years; how the funds will be distributed across the law enforcement, prosecution, courts, and victim services categories; the types of programs to support with grant dollars; and how the success of grant-funded activities will be evaluated. 6. During the annual internal review of applications for all OVW discretionary grant programs, including the Arrest, LAV, and Rural programs, applications that propose projects that are substantially outside the scope of the statutory purpose areas are disqualified from further funding consideration. Applications that do not include signed memoranda of understanding with their project partners are deemed incomplete and are disqualified; applicants that fail to demonstrate the existence of true community partnerships in their memoranda will be subject to scoring reductions; applicants that propose project activities that may compromise victim safety are subject to scoring reductions. Please see Scoring Forms for the Arrest, LAV, Rural and STOP Programs.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) uses the Number of communities with improved capacity for a coordinated community response (CCR) to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking to address violence against women as a primary long-term performance measure. A CCR is a collaborative, multidisciplinary effort within a jurisdiction to respond to crimes of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Police, prosecutors, judges, victim advocates, faith leaders, and others form lasting partnerships to develop policies and programs that protect victims and hold offenders accountable. The CCR is at the heart of the Violence Against Women Act and is a critical component of each grant program. Measuring the quality and success of a CCR is difficult. Ideally, a CCR brings about a philosophical change in the community that encourages various stakeholders to work together to help victims and bring perpetrators to justice. This change happens gradually and may not be reflected in measurable terms. All applicants, however, including those applying to the STOP, Arrest, LAV, and Rural programs, must demonstrate they have formed or will form collaborations, by signing a memorandum of understanding (MOU), with community partners in order to receive funding. The MOU helps to demonstrate that any funded entity is working toward building a CCR in their community. OVW tracks one other long-term performance measure to reflect more fully whether grantees are achieving the goals of VAWA: the number of grant-funded, multi-disciplinary training events that have occurred. Though this measure is more output-based than outcome-based, it still represents a critical component of what contributes to an effective and successful CCR. How well the criminal justice system responds to violent crimes against women is largely dependent on how its members are trained. An increase in persons trained can positively impact the number of victims that receive referrals to services at the time of the violent event. It can also positively impact a judge's understanding of when a protection order is warranted. Though outcome-based, increased training within a jurisdiction can be directly linked to improved coordination in cases of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. OVW developed these measures to reflect activities that occur across nearly all Violence Against Women grant programs, and they suggest the implementation of promising approaches that have a demonstrated effect on victim safety and offender accountability.

Evidence: 1. FY 2005 OVW Performance Budget Congressional Submission (Pages 2-3). 2. FY 2005 Quarterly Status Reports. 3. FY 2005 Semi-annual progress reporting forms. 4. OVW Strategic Plan 2005 - 2008 (Pages 2-3). 5. Please see the Muskie data sheet entitled, "Grantee Information about Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs."

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) uses the number of communities with improved capacity for a coordinated community response to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking as its primary long-term performance measure. The target for FY 2006 is 3,300 communities and the target for FY 2007 is 3,400, reflecting an expectation of increased growth in the number of communities providing a CCR, as well as increased confidence in the achievement of the goal as grantee activities shift to further implementation of this key program goal. The ultimate success of a CCR may be when the community assumes financial support of the CCR and is able to sustain the efforts on its own. OVW continues to explore ways of measuring the ability of grantees to sustain their programs after Federal funding has ended. Baselines and targets for a subsequent year have been established for OVW's other long-term measure, the number of grant funded multi-disciplinary training events that have occured.

Evidence: OVW reviews past approporiation levels against past long term program measures and then sets targets and time frames when new budgets are developed and submitted to OMB and the Congress. 1. FY 2007 OVW Performance Budget Congressional Submission (Pages 2-3) 2. FY 2005 Quarterly Status Report (4th Quarter)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women's annual program performance measures are: 1. Number of people trained; 2. Percent of victims requesting services who received them; 3. Application Processing Time; 4. Ratio of M&A Budget to OVW program dollars. The percent of victims requesting services who received them is a key outcome-focused performance measure. Some of the performance data collected by OVW focuses on apparent outputs rather than long-term outcomes. Such measures, however, reflect whether grantees are implementing promising approaches that have a demonstrated impact on victim safety and offender accountability. For example, the number of people trained (an output) provides an indicator of the extent to which professionals in the community have the knowledge necessary to assist victims, thereby helping to mitigate further abuse (an outcome).

Evidence: 1. FY 2007 OVW Performance Budget Congressional Submission (Pages 21, 27 and 30). 2. FY 2005 Quarterly Status Report 3. Muskie data collection document entitled, "Grantee Information about Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs."

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has baseline data for all of its annual performance measures. The targets are tied to funding levels, which are somewhat uncertain for 2007. The targets provide for relatively slightly increasing levels of activity while assuming efficiencies achieved remain stable. Note that the performance data are for the Arrest, LAV, and Rural programs, as data collection has only just begun for the STOP formula grants.

Evidence: 1. FY 2005 OVW Quarterly Performance Report. 2. OVW FY 2007 OVW Performance Budget Congressional Submission (Pages 19-24 (Arrest), 26-28 (LAV), 23-25 (Rural), and 8-10 (STOP)). 3. FY 2005 Muskie Summary Sheets. 4. Muskie data collection document entitled, "Grantee Information about Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs." 5. SAPR Information (awaiting from Muskie)

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: In 2001, the Offive on Violence Against Women (OVW), with the assistance of the Muskie School of Public Service, University of Southern Maine (Muskie School), established the VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative. OVW, with the help of the Muskie School, has developed semi-annual progress report forms for each of its grant programs, including the Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs. State Administrators for the STOP program are required to report annually. These reports request specific data on grantee activities, from victim services to training to criminal justice functions. The reports are designed to require input from all project partners who receive any funding. Each grantee must complete these progress reports and include performance data that relate to the annual performance measures. In addition, each solicitation requires applicants to present a plan for sustaining their project goals and objectives after federal funding ceases. To receive funding, each project partner involved in implementing project goals must help develop the application, approve the proposed budget, and contribute resources. This commitment is formalized in the required memorandum of understanding and corresponding signatures of the departmental heads or agency authorized representatives.

Evidence: 1. The Violence Against Women Act of 2000 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm. Please see 42 U.S.C. § 3789p for information on the measuring effectiveness provision. 2. For more information on the VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative with the Muskie School, please see: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei. 3. Award Special Conditions Solicitations require applicants to present a plan for sustaining their project goals and objectives after federal funding ceases. 4. The FY 2006 Arrest Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf (Page 17). 5. The FY 2006 Rural Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf (Page 16). 6. The FY 2006 LAV Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf (Page 15). 7. The FY 2006 STOP Program Solicitation can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006STOPsolicitationfinal.pdf 8. Progress Reporting Forms for the Arrest, Rural, STOP and LAV Programs can be found at http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/forms.htm.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has ensured that each of its major grant programs receives a periodic evaluation. Generally conducted by nongovernmental organizations under cooperative agreements with the Office of Justice Program's National Institute of Justice, these evaluations are sufficiently independent. However, employing a variety of survey, process evaluation, and/or pre-post test designs, the evaluations do not provide good evidence of outcomes--and, ultimately, the true effectiveness of the programs. OVW will consider the use of more rigorous comparison group studies as it plans for continued evaluation activity. Because these studies are very costly, OVW will look into setting aside funding for comparative studies, and will put in place a plan to move toward a more rigorous schedule for evaluation to include organizations that offer cost effective evaluation trials.

Evidence: Since 1996, approximately every two years, evaluations of one or more of OVW's grant programs or special initiatives have been conducted. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has had management oversight of these evaluations. OVW transferred funding to NIJ to support the evaluations, and subsequently NIJ issued solicitations from organizations to conduct the independent evaluations. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) NIJ awarded cooperative agreements to the Institute for Law and Justice (ILJ) to provide independent, national evaluations of the Arrest and LAV Programs. In 2003, ILJ completed an independent, national evaluation of the Arrest grantees, which followed a group of grantees from 1996 to 1999. This evaluation included a survey of 130 Arrest grantees, a process evaluation involving 20 Arrest grant projects, and an impact evaluation involving 6 Arrest projects. The evaluation had two main objectives: 1) To explore the impact of the Arrest program on offender accountability and victim safety; and 2) to use combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to document both the national scope of the Arrest program and the implementation and outcomes of local projects. (See: Institute for Law and Justice: National Evaluation of the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program (2002): http://www.ilj.org/publications/ArrestPolicies.pdf; see: National Evaluation of the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program, Revised Final Report: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/199441). In FY 2000, ILJ conducted an independent, national evaluation of OVW's Civil Legal Assistance grant program. The evaluation had three main objectives to: 1) document the range of local activities and programs supported by the FY 1998 - FY 2000 civil legal assistance grants; 2) conduct a process evaluation by examining and documenting civil legal assistance grantee planning and implementation efforts; and 3) evaluate the effectiveness of civil legal assistance programs in meeting the needs of the victims they serve. (See: Institute of Law and Justice: National Evaluation of the Legal Assistance for Victims Program( 2005): http://www.ilj.org/publications/LAV_FINAL_FINAL_RPT.pdf; also see: National Evaluation of the Legal Assistance for Victims Program Final Report: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208612). NIJ awarded cooperative agreements to the Urban Institute to provide independent, national evaluations of the STOP Formula Grant and Arrest Programs. (See: Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women, 2001 Report, October 2002, NCJ 197059: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/197059.pdf; also see: National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program Final Report: Volume I Executive Summary Evaluation Report, December 2002, NCJ 198127: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/198127.pdf).

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women's (OVW's) budget submissions link resources requested to the achievement of specific annual and long-term performance goals for the Violence Against Women Programs. OVW submits performance goals and data as part of its OMB and Congressional budget submissions. Specific funding requests are tied to explicit performance targets. The tie between resources and performance outcomes is made for the prior year, current year, and budget year so that the reader can evaluate the change in performance that is "bought" for specific levels of resources.

Evidence: See, for example, the FY 2007 OVW Performance Budget Congressional Submission (especially pages 2, 20, 27, and 30).

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: Though the Office on Violence Against Women has ensured that each of its major grant programs has been evaluated periodically, the evaluations do not provide good evidence of outcomes. To correct this deficiency, OVW has contacted an external organization with expertise in evidence-based evaluation for advice and guidance on funding high quality evaluations of OVW grant programs that are both rigorous and cost efficient. A meeting is planned in the near future to discuss how OVW can accomplish this goal to provide a better picture of the effectiveness of the Violence Against Women Programs. Congress also recognized the need for scientific evaluations for the Violence Against Women Programs in the 2005 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). For example, the law - at 42 U.S.C. 13295(b)(7) - specifies that Federal agencies dispersing VAWA funds shall set aside up to 3% of such funds for evaluations of specific VAWA-funded programs, projects, or evaluations of promising practices or problems emerging in the field that can inform agencies as to which programs or projects are likely to be effective.

Evidence: 1. Discussions with OVW staff indicate plans to reach out to an independent organization with expertise in evidence-based evaluation. 2. The Violence Against Women Act 2005, as amended, can be found at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h3402enr.txt.pdf.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) collects a variety of performance data to inform program management, make resource decisions, and assess program performance of all its grant programs, including the STOP, Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs. OVW has developed the VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative, a new program-specific grantee progress reporting format that addresses the wide range of grant-funded activities. OVW has carefully consulted with grantees, experts in the field, and other Federal agencies in creating these reports. OVW has designed a grantee reporting system that collects data to be used for congressional reporting requirements, GPRA, annual budget submissions, quarterly performance reports, and program development, management, and oversight. These progress reports capture all activities funded under the grant, including those of project partners. OVW grantees are required to submit completed progress reports semi-annually through the Office of Justice Programs' Grants Management System, an electronic data collection system. (STOP grantees report annually.) OVW program specialists continually monitor the timeliness and quality of grantee progress reports. OVW examines progress reports to assess whether grantees are achieving program goals, conducting approved program activities, complying with program requirements, and identifying grantees in need of OVW on-site monitoring. Progress reports also are reviewed to determine technical assistance needs for specific grantees and for grant programs as a whole, to identify promising practices, and to ensure that project activities are on track, meeting established timelines, and remaining within spending limits. In addition to using the information to assess individual grantee performance, OVW can aggregate data to examine a specific grant program and ensure the grant program is meeting its strategic goals and achieving results consistent with statutory provisions.

Evidence: Additional information on the VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative can be found at: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/index.htm. Examples of the progress reporting forms used for the STOP, Arrest, LAV and Rural Grant Programs can be found at: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/forms.htm. Additional grant monitoring activities are documented in the OVW Grants Monitoring Manual (Please see "Monitoring Objectives," "Scope, Types and Frequency of Monitoring," and "Major Monitoring Activities in the Life of a OVW Grant or Cooperative Agreement.").

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: On June 30, 2004, the Attorney General transmitted decisions on the SES Performance-based Pay System to OPM and OMB with the Human Capital report, including a generic work plan for all Departmental SES members, with accompanying Performance "contract" that must explicitly relate to the Department's, the President's or the AG's defined goals. On December 10, 2004, DOJ obtained approval for the SES and GS/Prevailing Rate performance orders. Additionally, DOJ completed the application package for OPM/OMB certification of the DOJ SES Performance Management and Compensation Plan. DOJ components implemented five-level performance plans for all SES. New SES and manager plans include cascading tasks/assignments that are linked to the DOJ Strategic Plan and the PMA. By Dec 30, 2004, all DOJ components certified to the Attorney General that all SES and direct report performance work plans are in place. The Department has performance appraisals for more than 60% of the work force, that: link to agency mission, goals and outcomes in DOJ's Strategic Plan; hold employees accountable for results appropriate to their level of responsibility; effectively differentiate between various levels of performance; and provide consequences based on performance. All Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) managers are subject to the new DOJ Performance Management System. All program specialists, who are responsible for managing 99% of OVW grants and cooperative agreements, are subject to performance work plans (PWP). Included in a PWP are quantifiable performance standards such as "conducting on-site monitoring visits to at least 10% of their grantees" during the fiscal year. The PWP holds program specialists accountable and requires program specialists to monitor grantee "progress and compliance with applicable guidelines and regulations." The SES and manager performance plans include cascading tasks and assignments that are linked to the DOJ Strategic Plan. For OVW grantees, program partners, and sub-grantees, OVW enforces the guidelines in OJP's Office of the Comptroller's Financial Guide. OVW further holds grantees and program partners accountable for costs through an internal and external peer review process, which is conducted on a pre-award basis. As part of this process, reviewers assess the cost effectiveness of proposed projects and evaluate whether the individuals and organizations involved are qualified to implement each project. OVW may request that successful applicants revise their grant budgets based on this review process. As noted in response 3.1, OVW grantees must submit semi-annual electronic progress reports on program activities and program effectiveness measures. Program specialists review and approve all progress reports semi-annually. If grantees fail to report, OVW may freeze of funds or determine that grantees are ineligible for future awards. OVW holds its grantees accountable with special grant conditions that regulate and withhold the flow of grant awards based on performance. OVW solicitations require applicants applying for continued funding to report on the "status of their current projects." OVW uses these reports as well as analyses of grantee compliance with reporting requirements to assess overall project performance and determine continued project funding.

Evidence: 1. Performance Management System (PMS) for general schedule and prevailing rate employees. OJP Financial Guide 2005 (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/FinGuide/) 2. OJP Grants Manager's Manual (Please see Chapter 8: Performance Monitoring) 3. 2004 OVW Grant Solicitations for Arrest, LAV and Campus Programs. Please see Application Requirements (Arrest: Pages 6-12; LAV: Pages 4-6; and Campus: Pages 8-17) 4. OVW Program Specialist Performance Work Plans 5. FY 04 OVW Grant Program Award Schedule 6. FY 04 OVW Internal Grant Program Application Review Forms (For Arrest, LAV and Campus Programs) 7. OVW Organization Chart/Unit Assignments 8. OVW Progress Reporting Forms: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/forms.htm 9. Grant Award Special Conditions 10. Sample SES and Management PWPs.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: For recent years, the bulk of Violence Against Women Program funding has been obligated within the fiscal year of appropriation. As a newly transferred component within the Offices, Boards, and Divisions portion of the Department of Justice in 2004, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) had to create an internal process for its financial management and accounting. To enhance OVW's current system, OVW retained the services of BearingPoint, a strategic consulting firm, to help improve collection of quarterly financial reports, expedite grant closeout, and de-obligate unexpended funds. Through this initiative, OVW expects to increase the timeliness of financial reports, close outstanding grants, and establish a procedure to continue this process as a part of standard grant administration operating procedures. A number of institutional structures ensure that funds are spent for their intended purposes. First, the Office of the General Counsel in the Department's Justice Management Division reviews all solicitations and grant awards to ensure they adhere to statutory requirements contained in authorizing and appropriations legislation. Second, internal and external peer reviews ensure that all grant applications meet solicitation requirements. Third, OVW, in conjunction with OJP's Office of the Comptroller, monitors "draw down" and expenditure of awarded funds. Financial status reports from recipients are closely examined to ensure that funds are being spent as scheduled; are dedicated to costs allowable by program objectives, the terms of the agreement and the Department of Justice fiscal requirements; and are in compliance with Federal cash management regulations and OMB A-123, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations, as appropriate. Fourth, the Office of the Inspector General and OJP's Office of the Comptroller conduct on-site reviews to determine whether: (1) grantees are properly accounting for the receipt and expenditure of Federal funds, and (2) expenditures are in compliance with Federal requirements and award special conditions. Fifth, OVW program specialists closely review financial reports and progress reports to ensure that funds are being spent for program purposes. Lastly, OVW management rigorously assesses requests for no-cost extensions and changes to grant budgets.

Evidence: 1. FY 2004 Appropriation, $383 Million. 2. FY 2004 Un-obligated Balance, $17 Million. 3. FY 2005 Appropriation, $382 Million. 4. FY 2005 Un-obligated Balance, $9 Million. 5. Bearing Point Contract with OVW 6. OVW monitors drawdowns by accessing Financial Status reports completed by the Office of the Comptroller (OC). This information is also available to OVW staff via IFMIS, a computer program that can provide the drawdown history of all grantees. OVW and OC use the Financial status reports and the drawdown history on IFMIS to monitor grantee expenditures. The Financial Status report forms can be accessed online at: https://sf269.ojp.usdoj.gov/sf269/. Examples of a completed sf269 and a drawdown history are available via hardcopy.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) maintains a focus on holding down overhead costs, the funding needed to administer the Violence Against Women Programs. OVW has set a goal of limiting these costs to 3% of program dollars, which is reflected in one of OVW's efficiency measures. OVW also has taken steps to reduce the amount of time needed to process grant awards. Application processing time was 177 days in 2004. In 2005, OVW achieved a reduction to 139 days. Future reductions will be more difficult to achieve, but OVW has set a target to reduce processing time by an additional two days in 2006. OVW proposes an additional efficiency measure to reflect the ratio of the M&A budget to OVW program dollars. Prior to becoming a separate OBD, OVW's M&A budget was managed by OJP. Now that OVW manages its own M&A, OVW is able to show a more accurate picture of how much is spent to manage OVW operations. The first year as a separate OBD was FY 2005, which OVW has chosen as its baseline year. During that time, OVW spent three percent of its budget on M&A. The goal (and therefore the target) is to spend no more than three percent of OVW's budget on M&A in the foreseeable future. Should OVW spend more than three percent, OVW will acknowledge this in its performance measure section and provide the necessary justification.

Evidence: 1. For application processing time measure, please see 2007 Congressional Budget Submission 2. Quarterly performance reports

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) collaborates on a regular basis with other Federal, state, local, and private entities to share promising practices, co-sponsor conferences and meetings on common issues, and discuss policy questions that impact shared constituent groups. OVW works very closely with other Federal agencies, such as the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Defense, to address such issues as the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment (the "Greenbook Initiative") and sexual assault in the military (training for advocates and JAGs). OVW and the Office for Women's Health in HHS share the joint responsibility for managing the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women. The Advisory Committee provides advice and guidance to the Attorney General and HHS Secretary on implementation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The two agencies work together to select the members, develop the agenda, and chair the meetings. Many Federal partnerships involve extensive collaboration with those on the state, local, and tribal levels. For example, the Greenbook Initiative requires communities to implement guidelines published by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. In addition, OVW has formed strong collaborative ties with sister agencies within the Department of Justice, such as the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), and the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC). OVW transfers VAWA funds each year to NIJ to conduct violence against women research and evaluation; NIJ, in turn, includes OVW staff in application review. OVW provided funding to BJS to develop a supplemental survey on stalking for the National Crime Victimization Survey. OVW and BJS staff met weekly to develop the survey instrument, test its validity, and develop training materials for the survey interviewers. OVW has always worked closely with OVC, as both agencies fund grants associated with violence against women. Though OVW and OVC both provide grant funding for domestic violence and sexual assault services, where the funds come from and how they are used is quite different. Even so, coordination between the two agencies is still critical. OVC disperses funds through the Crime Victims Fund, a fund comprised of deposits from criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalties, and special assessments. About half of the money goes to state victim compensation programs and the other half to state assistance programs. Unlike VAWA funds, this money is primarily used for direct services for victims. A small portion of funds from the Fund are discretionary. OVC develops a program plan each year for their discretionary funds that outlines their priorities for the coming year. This program plan is shared with OVW while still in its development phase to ensure that there is no overlap in the proposed initiatives. In addition, senior staff from OVW and OVC meet monthly for coordination meetings to share information on upcoming grant solicitations, new initiatives, meetings and conferences, office priorities, and other areas of interest. OVC staff members have served as peer reviewers for OVW and are frequently consulted for OVW projects. Also, OVC coordinates with OVW on all its violence against women technical assistance requests and on events associated with Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking Awareness Months. In April 2006, OVC and OVW co-hosted their second Web Forum featuring the coordinated community response to sexual assault.

Evidence: 1. Please see: http://www.thegreenbook.info/part.htm for information on the Greenbook Initiative. 2. National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women charter 3. E-mail from NIJ asking OVW staff to review applications 4. Speech of Diane M. Stuart at the 10th Anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act Symposium 5. OVC Technical Assistance Request Form and fax cover sheet 6. OVC/OVW Web Forum Announcement: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/saamwebforumannouncement.pdf 7. 2005 Report of the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women. 8. OVC Website: http://www.ovc.gov/

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) uses the Department's financial management system for Offices, Boards, and Divisions (OBD), which is in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. OBD received an "unqualified opinion" for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. An unqualified opinion means that the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position and the results of the entity's operations. However, a report of the independent auditors suggested that changes were needed in DOJ's internal controls to ensure that the proper "checks and balances" were in place. OVW took this suggestion one step further and in an effort to proactively address this issue. OVW drafted its own standard operating procedures to prepare for future reviews and to better monitor financial management. OVW is required to quarterly submit certification of open obligations, which are then signed by the accounting officer and certified by the Director. OVW's Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) are currently in draft form. It is expected that the management and administration section will be completed by September 30, 2006, and the grants administration section will be completed in 2007. A draft copy of the SOP was provided to the Office of the Inspector General in May 2006.

Evidence: 1. FY2005 Performance and Accountability Report can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2005/TableofContents.htm 2. Independent Auditors' Report on Financial Statements http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2005/P3/p07-10.pdf 3. Independent Auditors' Report on Internal Controls over Financial Reporting http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2005/P3/p11-30.pdf 4. FY 2005 Financial Management Status Report and Five Year Plan Summary http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/annualreports/pr2005/Appd/A-f.pdf 5. Draft OVW Standard Operating Procedures 6. Quarterly Open Obligation Report 7. A-123 Document

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: In 2002, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) instituted a major restructuring to address management deficiencies and increase productivity among staff. Formerly, the OVW program specialists were assigned to manage grants in specific states, regardless of the grant program under which those awards were made. Other staff was assigned to program development or policy development. This structure required that program specialists be knowledgeable about ten different and complex grant programs. At present, OVW is structured so that staff members manage grants and develop policy and programs within a specific grant program. This reorganization of staff responsibilities enabled OVW to decrease the number of grants that one staff person manages without increasing the total number of authorized personnel. The restructuring also increased staff accountability, improved internal coordination, and enhanced program knowledge within the individual units created. Each unit now comprises one to three grant programs and is managed by an Associate Director, who in turn reports to the Principal Deputy Director. Each staff member within a unit has an additional responsibility to serve as the unit's "point of contact" on a particular issue (e.g., drafting a program solicitation, organizing peer review, serving as GMS liaison, serving as evaluation and VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative point of contact, etc.). The points of contact from each unit meet as a group to identify problems and come up with solutions that can be applied across the grant programs.

Evidence: 1. March 1, 2002 Memorandum to Stuart Smith regarding the proposed reorganization of the Office on Violence Against Women 2. OVW's Organizational Chart and Unit breakdown

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: As a condition of receiving formula grant funding for the STOP Program, all states must complete a form that certifies that: 1) funds will only be used for specified statutory purposes. 2) an implementation plan will be developed in consultation with nonprofit, nongovernmental victim services programs. 3) funds will be allocated consistent with the statutory formula. 4) federal funds will no supplant non-federal funds. 5) victims of sexual assault will not bear financial responsibility for the costs of forensic medical examinations. 6) victims will not bear the costs associated with the filing or criminal charges or charges associated with the filing, issuance, registration or service of a warrant, protection order or petition for a protection order. 7) the state's judicial administrative policies and practices do not include notification to domestic violence offenders of the requirements of 18 U.S.C. 922 (g) (8) and (g)(9). 8) no law enforcement officer, prosecuting officer or other government official requires victims to submit to a polygraph examination. All implementation plans are reviewed and approved by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). STOP administrators must complete an annual progress reporting form that addresses the activities of all subgrantees and must submit it through the Grant Management System (GMS). Each progress report must be reviewed and approved by OVW so that program specialists may review activities funded under the STOP Program. GMS does not allow a State Administrator to submit a progress report until all previously due progress reports have been submitted and approved by the OVW program specialist. This serves as a check on timely submission by the State Administrator, as well as timely review by the program specialist. As part of their "performance work plans," OVW program specialists are required to develop a monitoring plan for each STOP grant and to conduct on-site monitoring to States on a periodic basis in response to a request for technical assistance from a State or because an issue that has come to the attention of OVW staff warrants oversight. OVW supervisors' review of program specialists' performance includes an assessment of program specialist compliance with grant monitoring requirements. Program specialists continually monitor the timely submission and quality of grantee financial status reports and progress reports. Financial status reports are reviewed for grant obligations and draw-downs in order to monitor grant activity. OVW adheres to the guidelines in OJP's Office of the Comptroller's Financial Guide.

Evidence: 1. STOP Program Annual Progress Report. 2. STOP Program Solicitation (www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf). This includes the certification form and STOP statutory purpose areas. 4. Special conditions. 5. Sample Implementation Plan. 6. Policy memos from OVW Director Diane Stuart. 7. Internal Award Memorandum

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: The STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program collects grantee performance data on an annual basis. Performance data from FY 1999 through FY 2003 can be found in the 2004 STOP program annual report to Congress. Prior to calendar year 2004, grantee performance data for the STOP program was submitted through Subgrant Award Performance Reports (SAPRs) reporting forms, which were originally designed by the Urban Institute in cooperation with the National Institute of Justice. With the implementation of the new Annual Progress Report for STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program, the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) eliminated the SAPRs. Currently, OVW requires STOP grantees (the 56 States and Territories) to submit two types of annual reports. The first, the Annual STOP Administrators Report, is completed by state administering agencies ("STOP Administrators"), is due March 30 of each year, and is submitted via the Grants Management System. This Administrators report contains very basic information about state administration of formula funds. The second report, the Annual Progress Report for STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant Program, is to be completed by each subgrantee of STOP funds and submitted to STOP Administrators, who in turn submit all State subgrantee reports to OVW. These annual subgrantee reports contain detailed information regarding subgrantee activities funded with STOP monies. OVW implemented the use of both forms in August 2005 for data collected in calendar year 2004. The 2004 STOP Annual Report, containing performance data for 2004, has been submitted to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS) to be abstracted and posted on the publicly available NCJRS website.

Evidence: 1. The 2004 STOP Annual Report has been sent to NCJRS to be abstracted and posted on the publicly available NCJRS Abstracts Data Base (www.ncjrs.gov). Throught he Abstracts Data Base, the report is made available through copy reproduction or Inter-library loan.

Are grants awarded based on a clear competitive process that includes a qualified assessment of merit?

Explanation: The core of the Office of Violence Against Women's (OVW's) non-formula grant award decision-making process is the competitive review process, including both internal and external peer review. In 2004 and 2005, 99 percent of all grant applications to OVW's discretionary programs were subject to internal review and external peer review. Each solicitation includes a set of selection criteria by which peer reviewers will evaluate an applicant's need for federal resources; their understanding of the problem to be addressed; a proposed project goals, objectives and activities; the capability and experience of project partners; the allocation of budget resources; and a plan for sustainability beyond federal support. OVW uses the solicitation criteria to develop peer review scoring forms for each discretionary grant program. All applications are subject to an initial internal review to confirm applicant eligibility and compliance with any statutory or solicitation application requirements. In addition, OVW assesses applicants for continuation funding based on their prior performance. Program specialists assess the continuation applicant's record of compliance with programmatic and financial reporting requirements, history of participation in required OVW technical assistance events, compliance with all special conditions on their existing grant award, and compliance with OMB audit requirements. Continuation applicants who have failed to comply with any of the criteria are subject to the loss of up to 25 points from their total review score. If OVW finds an applicant substantially out of compliance, OVW may disqualify the application from further consideration. Once internal review is complete, eligible applications are forwarded to an external peer review process during which each application is reviewed by a panel of expert peer reviewers. The experience of the peer reviewers reflects the focus of the program. For example, the Arrest Program uses victim advocates, judges, law enforcement officers, and prosecutors as peer reviewers. OVW does not use "professional" peer reviewers, but instead uses individuals with relevant professional experience who are able to assess whether grant proposals meet the criteria in the OVW solicitation. After the completion of both internal and external review, OVW staff makes recommendations to the Director based on the composite scores of each application. The Director then makes final funding decisions.

Evidence: OVW supplies each peer reviewer a copy of the current peer review guidelines, relevant program solicitation, a program-specific peer review scoring form. The Guidebook lays out the application process and OVW's expectations of peer reviewers, including information about conflicts of interest and the confidentiality of the peer review process. 1. OVW FY2006 Peer Review Guidelines Manual. Each year OVW issues a new and updated peer review guidebook. 2. The FY06 Arrest Program Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf, Page: 11. 3. The FY06 LAV Program Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf, Page: 9. 4. The FY06 Rural Solicitation: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf, Page: 9. 5. Peer Review Scoring Forms for the Arrest, LAV, Rural and STOP Programs. 6. Discussions between OMB and OVW staff, August 2006.

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has twenty program specialists assigned to its grant programs who manage approximately 1,546 grants and cooperative agreements. In November 2001, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) released the report, Justice Discretionary Grants: Byrne Program and Violence Against Women Office Grant Monitoring Should Be Better Documented (GAO-02-25), which found that OVW needed to improve its monitoring activities and documentation. In response to this GAO report, OVW has taken a number of steps to improve its monitoring, including the creation of the OVW Monitoring Manual, which sets the methodology by which monitoring is conducted and documented. In addition, as part of their "performance work plans," OVW program specialists are required to develop a monitoring plan for each grant and cooperative agreement and to conduct on-site monitoring to at least 10% of their grantees each year. OVW supervisors' review of program specialists' performance includes an assessment of program specialist compliance with grant monitoring requirements. Program specialists continually monitor the timely submission and quality of grantee financial status reports and progress reports. Financial status reports are reviewed for grant obligations and draw-downs in order to monitor grant activity. OVW adheres to the guidelines in OJP's Office of the Comptroller's Financial Guide. OVW uses program-specific semi-annual progress report forms to track how grantees use funds in eligible activity categories. Grantees must submit their completed progress reports on-line through GMS. Each progress report must be reviewed and approved by OVW so that program specialists may assess each grantee's performance and progress towards the goals and objectives of the approved application. GMS does not allow a grantee to submit a progress report until all previously due progress reports have been submitted by the grantee and approved by the OVW program specialist. This serves as a check on timely submission by the grantee, as well as timely review by the program specialist.

Evidence: 1. Justice Discretionary Grants: Byrne Program and Violence Against Women Office Grant Monitoring Should Be Better Documented [GAO-02-25], http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/multidb.cgi. 2. OVW Grant Monitoring Manual. 3. Information on the GMS Internal and External User Guidelines can be found at: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/attachments/pdf/forms/OVW_External%20Instructions.pdf. 4. OVW Program Specialist Performance Work Plans. 5. OVW Site Visit Requirements Document. 6. Examples of Semi-Annual Progress Reports for Arrest, Rural, and LAV Grant Programs Progress Reports. 7. Performance and Resource Table, Page 7A-B. 8. OVW Organizational Chart and Unit Breakdown.

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: All Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) grantees for the non-formula grant programs, including those of the Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs, are required to complete a semi-annual progress report and submit it on GMS for the time periods January 1 through June 30 and July 1 through December 31. The Muskie School maintains a public website for the VAWA Measuring Effectiveness Initiative. At this website, the public can view sample progress reporting forms, "snapshots" of grantee activities organized by State, and grant program summaries of the data collected from OVW grantees. OVW makes information about individual grantees available to the public on request. Prior to a release, OVW scrutinizes grantee information to prevent the release of any information that might interfere with victim confidentiality, privacy or safety. In addition, information regarding the performance of OVW grantees is available through OVW's biennial Report to Congress on the effectiveness of its grant-funded activities.

Evidence: 1. For information about Muskie and measuring effectiveness, please see: http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/index.htm. 2. Measuring Effectiveness Reports for STOP (http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/formstop.htm), LAV (http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/formlav.htm), Rural (http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/formrural.htm) and Arrest (http://muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/formgtea.htm) Programs. 3. OVW has submitted the following statutorily mandated reports to Congress that contain performance data on OVW grantees: 2002 and 2004 Reports to Congress on the Effectiveness of VIolence Against Women Act Grant Activities. OVW is in the process of making these reports available on the OVW website. All statutorily mandated OVW reports to Congress are available to the public upon request and OVW is currently working with the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov to have these reports available online.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has demonstrated performance that exceeds targets for both its two long-term measures in 2006, and one of the two in 2005.

Evidence: 1. FY 2007 Performance Budget Congressional Report (Page 2-3). 2. FY 2005 Quarterly Performance Reports. 3. Performance and resources table, 7A-B.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: With baselines established in 2004, the Violence Against Women Act Programs have met or exceeded performance targets for thee of the four annual measures in both 2005 and 2006.

Evidence: 1. Muskie data collection document entitled, "Grantee Information about Arrest, LAV, and Rural Programs."

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has implemented numerous cost-saving measures in the last few years??especially relating to the grant peer review process, which has resulted in decreasing application processing time. Two areas of significant improvement include: (1) The use of facilitators as part of the peer review panel. The facilitator formerly took the lead on tracking the number of applications being read, collating the scoring sheets, and managing the activities of the review panel. OVW eliminated the facilitator position and placed these responsibilities in the hands of the peer reviewers themselves. This new process has resulted in cost savings estimated at $123,840. (2) The payment structure for peer reviewers. Peer reviewers were paid a daily rate of $350 for conducting peer review activities for three days. OVW changed its policy to pay peer reviewers $75 per application. The estimated annual savings were $300 per peer reviewer, or a total of $54,000. A significant cost savings was also achieved when OVW discontinued mailing post cards and began using electronic mail to alert grantees and other interested parties about upcoming solicitations, saving OVW $5,000 per year. OVW also has instituted improved efficiencies. For example, OVW has instituted an internal review to screen out ineligible applicants prior to peer review. OVW regularly reviews its internal policies and procedures to improve efficiency. For example, rather than creating a new automated reporting system for its progress reports, OVW worked in tandem with the Office of Justice Programs to incorporate the progress reports into the existing Grants Management System system.

Evidence: 1. NCJRS Communications Tracking Report OVW for 1/26/2006 is available via hardcopy. 2. For information on how OVW's online annual and semi-annual progress reporting forms, please see http://Muskie.usm.maine.edu/vawamei/index.htm.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: The programs that are most similar to the Violence Against Women Programs are those domestic violence programs operated by the states and other grantees funded by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). Because performance data for each of the states and OVW grantees is collected and aggregated by OVW, and is therefore reflective of the performance of the OVW programs, it is difficult to distinguish between the performance of the grantees and the OVW programs. The performance of the grantees on an aggregated basis essentially represents the performance of the Violence Against Women Programs. OVW is often compared to the Office of Victims of Crime (OVC), which resides within the Office of Justice Programs. Although the offices have some similar missions and goals, the ultimate objectives of the programs are somewhat different. OVC funds direct services for victims, which include women. OVC also places a partial emphasis on services that help mitigate violence against women. OVW funds, some of which also are used by organizations to provide victims services, are intended to foster system-based change that is intended to treat the problem of violence against women, not just the victims. Further, neither OVC nor any other federal agency administers grant programs that fund community coordinated responses to domestic violence, violence against women on campuses, and the needs of victims for legal assistance. Because the objectives of OVW and OVC are somewhat different, each program's performance goals and measures are quite different.

Evidence: 1. For information about the Office for Victims of Crime, please see: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/ 2. For access to the Victims of Crime Act, please see: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00010601----000-.html. 3. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/regulations.htm 4. The FY 2006 Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforcement of Protection Orders Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy06arrestsolicitationpostingversion.pdf. 5. The FY 2006 Rural Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fiscalyear2006ruralfinaldraft.pdf. 6. The FY 2006 LAV Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/ovwfy2006legalassistanceforvictimssolicitation.pdf. 7. The FY 2006 STOP Program Solicitation can be found at: http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/fy2006stopsolicitationfinal.pdf.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: Evaluations conducted periodically of the Office on Violence Against Women's (OVW's) major grant program have generally found the programs to be successful and effective. For example, findings have included: (1) many victims/survivors reported satisfaction with victim assistance services and the law enforcement response. (2) at many sites, the grants resulted in improved communication and cooperation among criminal justice agencies and community-based victim services organizations. (3) adoption of preferred or mandatory domestic violence arrest policies or new domestic violence law enforcement initiatives corresponded with an increase in law enforcement arrests or referrals to prosecutors. While these evaluations provide useful information about the way in which these programs may be effective, the evaluation designs generally have provided little information about actual outcomes. The use of well-designed comparison group studies could improve the ability of evaluators to determine whether the programs are effective. OVW is consulting with an external organization familiar with evidence-based evaluation about future evaluation efforts.

Evidence: 1. Evaluation of the STOP Formula Grants to Combat Violence Against Women, 2001 Report, October 2002, NCJ 197059: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/197059.pdf. 2. National Evaluation of the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies Program, Revised Final Report: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/199441.pdf. 3. National Evaluation of the Legal Assistance for Victims Program Final Report: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/208612.pdf. 4. National Evaluation of the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program Final Report: Volume I Executive Summary Evaluation Report, December 2002, NCJ 198127: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/198127.pdf).