 
PDF Version|
Executive Summary: The purpose of this program announcement is to award a cooperative agreement to establish a National Quality Improvement Center (QIC) to generate and disseminate knowledge on the representation of children and youth in the child welfare system. One of the barriers to adoption for these children is the lack of a trained and effective representative who can advocate for timeliness in the handling of their case by the child welfare agency and the court. Forty seven States in Round 1 had to enter into Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) Program Improvement Plans (PIPs) related to improving the length of time to adoption. The QIC will work to improve the quality and quantity of competent representation for children and youth in child welfare cases so that States and Tribes achieve the best safety, permanency and well-being outcomes for these children and youth. I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION Statutory Authority The statutory authority for this funding opportunity announcement is the Adoption Opportunities program, Section 203 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption Reform Act of 1978, (P.L. 95-266), as amended by the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-36). Description Children who enter foster care suffer greatly from not having a stable and permanent caring family. To prevent permanent damage to the child, the child welfare system must reunify these children with their families or provide permanent adoptive homes for them as soon as possible. Too often the children and youth experience foster care drift as they must move from home to home, preventing the permanent bonding a child needs. One of the barriers to adoption for these children is the lack of a trained and effective representative who can advocate for timeliness in the handling of their case by the child welfare agency and the court. The QIC will work to improve the quality and quantity of competent representation for children and youth in child welfare cases so that States and Tribes achieve the best safety, permanency and well-being outcomes for these children and youth. The overall goals of this project are:
The Quality Improvement Center (QIC) will be tasked with conducting a comprehensive review of the literature, and synthesizing the current research and evaluation of representation of children and youth in child welfare cases. Building on the lessons learned from these activities, the QIC will test and rigorously evaluate evidence-based and evidence-informed child representation models in use throughout the country. The QIC also will be charged with building a national learning network of public and private organizations that are working to address this issue. This will include supporting certification of lawyers as specialists in child welfare law by providing reimbursement for costs associated with State certification programs established by the NACC. The QIC will be awarded funds for a planning phase and, pending successful completion of that phase, an implementation phase. During the planning phase, the QIC will engage in a collaborative process to review the literature, clarify the focus of its work, and refine the implementation plan for the remainder of its activities. During the implementation phase, the QIC will sponsor, monitor, and be responsible for a cross-site evaluation of research or demonstration projects at multiple sites, as appropriate. These projects will test a variety of models or hypotheses related to improving child and youth representation. During this phase the QIC will provide funds annually for certification of lawyers as specialists in child welfare law. The QIC will offer technical assistance to the projects supported under this initiative, evaluate them, and provide for nationwide dissemination of the knowledge generated as an outcome of this work. Background The mission of the Children's Bureau is to promote the safety, permanency, and well-being of children, youth and families. To achieve these goals our nation's child welfare systems are faced with the challenge of producing positive outcomes for the children and families they serve. In recent years many States and Tribes have launched system improvement efforts to more efficiently respond to allegations of child abuse and neglect, utilize and manage staff time more effectively in relation to the degree of severity of the case, and ultimately to provide better case management for families coming to their attention. As a part of the initial round of Child and Family Service Reviews (CFSRs), States have developed Program Improvement Plans (PIPs) to target specific improvements in their child welfare systems. CSFR information may be accessed at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwmonitoring/index.htm In a parallel manner, under the stimulus of the Court Improvement Program (CIP), State juvenile and family courts have assessed their processes for handling child abuse and neglect cases and undertaken substantive improvements in the courts to achieve better outcomes for children and families. During the second round of CFSRs, the courts are increasingly joining their efforts with the child welfare agencies in the implementation of the PIPs. A key component of court processes for handling child abuse and neglect cases is the appointment of quality legal representation. The American legal system is based on the premise that parties have a due process right to be heard and that competing independent advocacy produces just results in each case. Competent representation is important for the agency and the parents in child welfare cases, but it is crucial for the child, as a court reviews agency decisions about the family and the need for removal, the suitability of the child's temporary placement, and the permanency decision that will result in either reunification or adoption. Numerous studies and reports have pointed out the importance of competent representation of children so that judges can make informed decisions about their future Federal and State child protection laws provide that in every case involving an abused or neglected child which results in a judicial proceeding, the child shall be provided an opportunity to be represented by an independent trained representative. This need for representation has long been recognized in the Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) which requires as a condition of receiving Federal grants that the States provide a trained guardian ad litem (GAL) for the child in every child welfare judicial proceeding. CAPTA requires that the States include in their child welfare program "provisions and procedures requiring that in every case involving an abused or neglected child which results in a judicial proceeding, a guardian ad litem who has received training appropriate to the role, and who may be an attorney or a court appointed special advocate who has received training appropriate to that role (or both), shall be appointed to represent the child in such proceedings - (I) to obtain first-hand, a clear understanding of the situation and needs of the child; and (II) to make recommendations to the court concerning the best interest of the child" (Section 106, (b)(2)(A)(xiii)). CAPTA specifies that the guardian ad litem requirement may be met by either an attorney or a CASA. Since enactment of the CAPTA requirement in 1974, all 50 States have enacted laws mandating representation for a child in dependency court proceedings. CAPTA does not define the role or responsibilities of GALs, and the State laws vary considerably in their approach to child representation. State statutes mandate the appointment of a GAL to protect the best interests of the child or youth, with some specifying that the GAL be an attorney, some specifying that the GAL be a CASA, and some allowing the GAL to be either an attorney or a CASA. Increasingly States are acknowledging that in some cases the expressed wishes of the child or youth may differ from the GAL's opinion of their best interests, particularly with older children, producing a dilemma for an attorney. While child advocates debate the merits of a client-directed approach versus a best interests approach, some State statutes require the GAL to present both views to the court and some States provide for a second attorney to be appointed. In 1995 the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges published Resource Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse & Neglect Cases which has been endorsed by the American Bar Association and the Conference of Chief Justices. Since their publication these guidelines have set the national standard for judicial practice in child welfare cases and many courts follow the practices endorsed in these guidelines. The Resource Guidelines acknowledge the wide range in the quality of counsel available and urge courts to ensure that parties have competent and diligent representation. Although CAPTA mandates a trained guardian ad litem for a child involved in a judicial proceeding and national organizations have issued guidelines and standards for representation of a child in dependency proceedings, it is clear that practice and policy in the States have not kept pace. For example, the American Bar Association House of Delegates adopted Standards of Practice for Lawyers Who Represent Children in Abuse and Neglect Cases in 1996. These standards can be accessed at http://www.abanet.org/child/repstandwhole.pdf. The ABA Standards, however, are merely advisory and have no legal authority in individual States. In spite of the enactment of State laws mandating representation for children and dissemination of these national standards, funding for GALs has been inconsistent and inadequate, and the quality of representation of children in dependency court remains poor in many cases. Child welfare falls under the family law jurisdiction of the States, and each State has developed its own guidelines and standards for representation in dependency court. As described by the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, "the availability and competence of legal representation for children and their parents in dependency proceedings is wildly inconsistent across the country, for many reasons" Although many attorneys serving in these cases have a high degree of dedication, there is an extraordinary range in the quality of counsel stretching to inactivity and incompetence, with attorneys meeting their clients only shortly before hearings in some cases. Inadequate legal representation results from a variety of factors ranging from the pressure of high caseloads to poor customs and low expectations of representation in the jurisdiction. Lack of experience, skills, training, and adequate compensation have been cited as issues having an impact on legal representation. The importance of representation in dependency court and the limitations of current practice were highlighted in the recent study on strengthening court oversight of children in foster care by the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care. One of the Commission's four court recommendations in its 2004 report called for "an informed and effective voice for children of all ages and capabilities in court through representation by better trained attorneys and volunteer advocates." Citing limited training for attorneys, the Commission recommended ongoing multi-disciplinary training for these attorneys throughout their careers. The Federal CIP requires State courts to conduct assessments and develop recommendations for improvement in the role, responsibilities, and effectiveness of State courts in carrying out State laws related to dependency court proceedings (Social Security Act, Section 438, 42 U.S.C. 629h). The States have latitude to conduct their assessments and focus recommendations on the broad range of State laws that implement titles IV-B and IV-E of the Social Security Act. Since the inception of the program, all State courts have conducted the assessment required for initial receipt of CIP funding in the 1990's, and the reassessment the Children's Bureau required to be completed by 2005. A recent report on a study analyzing 50 CIP reassessment reports submitted to the Children's Bureau points out that although the States reported that there have been improvements in representation for children since the initial assessment, many barriers remain and there is much work to be done. This report is in preparation as part of an evaluation of the Court Improvement Program conducted by Planning and Learning Technologies, Inc. For example,
State courts have utilized CIP funds to implement recommendations arising from the reassessments to draft attorney standards, expand CASA programs, implement pilot projects designed to improve legal representation of parties, and establish partnerships with local law schools to develop law clinics specializing in child welfare law. For further information about these efforts, see the Legal Representation of Parties category under the Court Improvement Catalog on the website of the National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues at http://www.abanet.org/child/rclji . Findings from the CFSRs have documented the conclusions of these reports and assessments about the poor quality of child representation in dependency courts. Forty seven States in Round 1 had to enter into CFSR PIPs related to improving the length of time to adoption. In some States and localities an insufficient number of available attorneys was noted. This lack of attorneys trained in child welfare leads to delays in adoption and other forms of permanency, as continuances are granted because of high caseloads and the courts' recognition that the attorneys are not adequately prepared. Stakeholders pointed out that attorney representation is not guaranteed in all courts, particularly in some rural areas, leading to inconsistent legal representation across these States. Although child welfare practice varies from State to State, in recent years there has been movement toward consensus on a national model of best practice for child welfare attorneys, based on Federal law and policy and practice guidelines and standards issued by national legal and judicial organizations. An important further step was the definition and creation of a new legal discipline to produce the highest quality legal service. In 2004 the American Bar Association accredited the National Association of Counsel for Children (NACC) to certify lawyers as specialists in child welfare. This development of a specialty for child welfare law recognized as a distinct field of legal practice has significant implications for the long-term improvement of representation of children, parents, and State agencies in dependency cases nationwide. The certification is modeled after physician board certification and requires that attorneys satisfy requirements related to time of involvement in the practice of child welfare law, continuing legal education credits, peer reviews, passage of the NACC national child welfare law exam and payment of a certification fee. NACC Child Welfare Law Attorney Certification is currently available in CB's mission of child safety, permanency, and well-being of children and families requires that it works to improve all aspects of the child welfare system, from prevention to adoption. CB will address the weaknesses in the area of child representation noted in the CFSRs and cited in the reports and assessments described above by establishment of a National Quality Improvement Center (QIC) on the Representation of Children in the Child Welfare System. The QIC will explore a broad range of issues and questions about how child representation is handled by the States and Tribes, identify different models of effective representation, study how to successfully implement these models, learn what kinds of collaborations and systems are essential to their success, develop and disseminate knowledge, and encourage replication of these effective models nationwide. The QIC will also promote growth in the numbers of lawyers certified as specialists in child welfare law by reimbursement of costs associated with NACC certification. During the first year of this grant (Phase I: Planning Year), the grantee will work collaboratively with CB to decide how to address these issues. For example, with help from CB and the QIC National Advisory Committee, the grantee will decide whether to take a broad look at a comprehensive set of questions or a more focused approach; which questions the project will answer during the literature review phase of the QIC project and which questions it will answer through implementation and evaluation of selected projects; and whether to focus its selected projects on a single region or take a national approach. In their applications, applicants must describe the process they propose to engage in during the planning year to refine and further define the focus and strategies for the remainder of the project. Questions of Interest to the Children's Bureau The list in Section IV.2 APPROACH is not intended to be exclusive, and applicants are encouraged to propose additional questions and justify their relevance. QIC Roles and Responsibilities Because CB's goal in funding this QIC is to improve child representation in child welfare cases, the QIC's approach is to generate and disseminate knowledge on effective practice models of child representation and to support attorneys seeking certification as specialists in child welfare law. The QIC will perform the following functions:
It must be emphasized that the QIC will not assume the training, technical assistance (T/TA), and information dissemination functions and responsibilities currently performed by CB's National Resource Centers, CB's Technical Assistance Implementation Centers, Child Welfare Information Gateway, and CB's other T/TA Network partners. One distinctive function of the QIC is that it will build knowledge in the area of child representation by testing models through supporting selected research and demonstration projects. The research topics for these projects will be identified during Phase I: Planning Year of this grant by the QIC, in conjunction with CB. The QIC will monitor and evaluate and provide technical assistance and support to these projects. Research and demonstration projects under this initiative must:
The QIC will also promote growth in the numbers of lawyers certified as specialists in child welfare law by payment of the NACC certification fee on their behalf. Certification support sponsored by the QIC under this initiative will focus on attorneys in those States that are beginning the establishment of a certification program. Specific Tasks to be Performed by the Quality Improvement Center during the Planning and Implementation Phases Applicants must propose a design that clearly and concisely describes a strategy for a 12-month planning phase (Phase I: Planning Year) for the development of the QIC. The Phase I plan also will include the process for identifying and selecting a research topic for research and demonstration projects, soliciting applications and selecting projects. Upon approval of the Phase I plan by CB, a 48-month implementation phase (Phase II) will follow. Early in Phase II, the QIC will conduct and evaluate 48-month research and demonstration projects. The QIC will also provide technical assistance (using its own resources or through sub-contracts with other technical assistance providers) to projects supported under this initiative. Applicants are required to support at least three research and demonstration projects. These projects will develop and implement, replicate, evaluate or systematize effective practice models of child representation, with specific components or strategies that are based on theory, research, or evaluation data. Also during Phase II: Implementation Phase, the QIC will announce support for up to 100 lawyers annually to be certified as specialists in child welfare law by reimbursement for costs associated with their NACC certification fee. In years two through five the project will allocate at least $700,000 per year to support research and demonstration projects and NACC certification fees. In addition, the QIC must cooperate fully with any national, cross-site evaluation of CB funded QICs requested by CB. The QIC also will be responsible for a cross-site evaluation of the research and demonstration projects it sponsors, as appropriate. Travel for Conferences and Presentations Within two months after the award of the 12-month planning phase (Phase I) of the cooperative agreement, the project director, evaluator and other key staff of the QIC must attend a one-day work planning meeting in Washington, D.C. with the Federal Project Officer and other CB staff for the purpose of discussing details of the project work plan and cooperative agreement. Additionally, 10 months after the award of the 12-month planning phase (Phase I) of the cooperative agreement, the QIC awardee must make an oral presentation to CB staff in Washington, D.C., describing and defending its plan for the Phase II - Implementation Plan (Version A) (described below). Applicants are advised to propose sending three project staff members, for up to two days, to make the presentation: the project director, the evaluator, and one other key partner. The budget for the 12-month planning phase should include funding for these two meetings, as well as funding for two key staff persons to attend the annual three-day CB grantees' meeting, usually held in the spring. In each of the four implementation years, the QIC awardee must send the project director and the evaluator to the annual grantee meeting. Grant funds should be budgeted for these travel expenses. Phase I: Planning Year Applicants must propose a Phase I plan that addresses the components described in the Background section of this announcement including: (1) the proposed membership and composition of the National Advisory Committee for the QIC: (2) an analysis of the current state of research on child representation in child welfare cases; (3) a feasible and appropriate method for conducting a comprehensive needs assessment; (4) a systematic approach to focusing the research topic and refining the implementation plan; (5) a strategy for developing a comprehensive review of the literature and best practices in child representation; (6) an approach and method for the timely development of the Phase II implementation plan; and (7) a preliminary design for the Phase II - Implementation Plan (Version A) that presents a clear and comprehensive vision of how the proposed QIC would operate. Although applicants will have considerable flexibility in developing an implementation strategy tailored to the needs and resources they identify during year one, applications for the first year of funding must explain how during Phase I the applicant would:
Applicants should propose specific methods for the needs assessment (e.g., written surveys, questionnaires, conference calls, focus groups, and unstructured telephone or in-person interviews) and realistic timelines.
In years two through five the project will allocate at least $700,000 per year to support research and demonstration projects and lawyer certifications. Where impact evaluations of sponsored demonstrations are included in the project plan, such evaluations must employ an experimental design based on the random assignment of individuals or cases to either a treatment group or a control group, or propose and justify an alternative evaluation plan of sufficient rigor to effectively measure impact and establish a cause and effect relationship. Impact evaluations will compare the experimental and control groups for statistically significant differences on selected outcome measures. The impact evaluation samples must be of sufficient size depending in part on the type of program intervention to be evaluated, as well as the level of services to which the non-treatment control group will be exposed. As appropriate, cross-site outcome evaluation plans must include a power analysis illustrating minimum detectable impacts estimated to justify the proposed research sample size. CB is particularly interested in QIC and selected project evaluation plans that incorporate a strong focus on the utilization of the research findings in practice throughout the implementation period. Because the QIC initiative is funded through a cooperative agreement, CB must give final approval at the end of Phase I: Planning Year to the Phase II: Implementation Plan before the grantee can move forward with the Phase II work plan and evaluation plan. Funding for Phase II is contingent upon this approval. Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version A) In Phase I: Planning Year, the QIC must develop and submit a Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version A) for conducting and evaluating research and demonstration projects and certification support. This plan must build on knowledge gained from a review of the literature and promising practices in the field, the results from the comprehensive needs assessment, and input from the National Advisory Committee and other sources. Applicants must submit a preliminary design for the Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version A) in this application that presents a clear and comprehensive vision of how the proposed QIC would operate. Applicants must describe the approach and processes that they would use to develop the implementation plan and address anticipated logistical and administrative issues. The Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version A) with any revisions made by the grantees since the application process, is due nine months after the award of the cooperative agreement and must include, at a minimum, the following components:
Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version B) Ten months after the award of the cooperative agreement, the grantee will make an oral presentation to CB staff in One month after this presentation, the QIC must submit a revised implementation work plan (Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version B)) incorporating the recommendations of CB staff. CB will review this plan and continued funding is contingent upon CB approval of this plan (Version B). Evaluation CB requires an objective rigorous evaluation of this grant project. This evaluation should be designed to collect systematic data to answer, at a minimum, the questions of interest to CB that are selected from those listed in this program announcement, and other questions proposed by the applicant and approved by the Bureau. The proposed evaluation plan should measure the effects of the implementation of the proposed project on rates of reunification and adoption, and other indicators of safety, permanency and well-being. Applicants are strongly encouraged to review the data indicators measured in CB's Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs) in identifying the outcomes they want to measure. The findings from the evaluation should support evidence-based practice and provide States with examples of strategies that are tied to positive outcomes for children and families. Specifically, the project's evaluation plan should consider using performance indicators that focus on increasing the safety, permanency and well-being of children and families being served by the supported projects. The proposed evaluation plan should yield data that can be compared to, and contrasted with, regional, State and national level CFSR data, as appropriate. Applicants should allocate an appropriate percentage of their budgets to support a rigorous program evaluation. References Dobbin, S.; Gatowski, S.; and Johns, K. Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: Representation as a Critical Component of Effective Practice. National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1998, p. 3. Guidelines for Public Policy and State Legislation Governing Permanence for Children, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999, p. VII-2. National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Resource Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases, 1995, p. 22. Report of the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Fostering the Future: Safety, Permanence and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care, 2004. Summaries of Twenty-Five State Court Improvement Assessment Reports, Technical Assistance Bulletin, Permanency Planning for Children Project, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1998, p. 18. II. AWARD INFORMATION
Awards under this announcement are subject to the availability of funds. Additional Information on Awards: In year one, the maximum Federal share of the project is not to exceed $1,000,000. In years two through five the maximum Federal share is not to exceed $1,000,000 per budget period. The project awarded will be for a project period of 60 months. The initial award will be for a 12-month budget period. The award of continuation beyond each 12-month budget period will be subject to satisfactory progress on the part of the awardee and a determination that continued funding would be in the best interest of the Federal Government. In years two through five the project will allocate at least $700,000 per year to support research and demonstration projects and certifications. Description of Anticipated Substantial Involvement under the Cooperative Agreement: A cooperative agreement is a specific method of awarding Federal assistance in which substantial Federal involvement is anticipated. A cooperative agreement clearly defines the respective responsibilities of CB and the grantee prior to the award. CB anticipates that agency involvement will produce programmatic benefits to the recipient otherwise unavailable to them for carrying out the project. The involvement and collaboration includes:
Please see Section IV.5 for any restrictions on the use of funds for awards made under this announcement. III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION 1. Eligible Applicants
Partnerships are encouraged between organizations with experience and expertise in child welfare and child representation, but applications must identify a primary applicant responsible for administering the grant. The primary applicant must be one of the eligible entities listed above. Foreign entities are not eligible under this announcement. Faith-based and community organizations are eligible to apply under this announcement. 2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Yes In year one, the grantee must provide at least 10 percent of the total approved cost of the project. The total project cost is the sum of the Federal and non-Federal share. For example, an applicant requesting $1,000,000 in year one must match a minimum of $111,111 (total project cost = $1,111,111) in year one. The following example shows how to calculate the required 10 percent match amount based on a Federal share of $1,000,000, as is required: $1,000,000 (Federal share) divided by .90 (100% - 10%) equals $1,111,111 (total approved project cost, including match) minus $1,000,000 (Federal share) equals $111,111 (required 10% match) The non-Federal share may be met by cash or in-kind contributions, although applicants are encouraged to meet their match requirements through cash contributions. The grantee will be held accountable for commitments of non-Federal resources even if they exceed the amount of the required match. Failure to provide the required amount will result in the disallowance of Federal funds. A lack of supporting documentation at the time of application will not exclude the application from competitive review. 3. Other: Disqualification Factors Applications with requests that exceed the ceiling on the amount of individual awards referenced in Section II. Award Information will be deemed non-responsive and will not be considered for funding under this announcement. Any application that fails to satisfy the deadline requirements referenced in Section IV.3., Submission Dates and Times, will be deemed non-responsive and will not be considered for funding under this announcement. IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION 1. Address to Request Application Package: ACYF Operations Centerc/o The Dixon Group, Inc. ATTN: Children's Bureau 118 Q St., NE Washington, DC 20002-2132 Phone: 866-796-1591 Phone 2: TTY 711 Email: cb@dixongroup.com For hearing or speech impaired callers, contact the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 (TTY (Text Telephone) / ASCII (American Standard Code For Information Interchange)). 2. Content and Form of Application Submission: This section provides information on the required form and content of application submissions. Applicants are required to submit one original and two copies of all application materials if applying in hard-copy. The original signature of the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) is required only on the original. Information on the required format, Standard Forms (SFs) and other forms, D-U-N-S Requirement, Project Description, Certifications, Assurances, Electronic Submission of applications, and Hard Copy submission of applications is available in this section. A Checklist of required application elements is available for applicants' use in Section VIII of this announcement. Each application must contain the following items in the order listed: Application for Federal Assistance. (Standard Form (SF) 424, SF-424A and SF-424-B). Follow the instructions that accompany the forms and those in Section IV.2, Application Review Information. Certifications/Assurances. See Forms, Assurances, and Certifications, below. Table of Contents. List the major sections of the application, and show the page that each section begins on. Project Summary/Abstract (one page maximum, double spaced). See Section IV.2, Project Description. Clearly mark this page with the applicant name as shown on SF-424, identify the program announcement and the title of the proposed project as shown on SF-424 and the service area as shown on SF-424. The summary description should not exceed 300 words. Care should be taken to produce a summary/abstract that accurately and concisely reflects the proposed project. The Project Description. Applicants should organize their project description in this sequence: 1) Objectives and Need for Assistance; 2) Approach; 3) Evaluation; 4) Organizational Profiles; and 5) Budget and Budget Justification. Budget and Budget Justification. Include information on the required cost item of Travel for Meetings and Presentations (see Section I). Indirect Charges. If claiming indirect costs, provide documentation that the applicant currently has an indirect cost-rate approved by HHS or another cognizant Federal agency. Third-Party Agreements. If applicable, include a letter of commitment or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from each partner and/or contractor describing their role, detailing specific project tasks to be performed, and expressing commitment to participate if the proposed project is funded. Note: General letters of support not expressing specific commitments are not required and will not be considered by reviewers under the evaluation criteria. Staff and Position Data. Include job descriptions and curriculum vitae/ resumes for proposed project staff. Page Limit. The length of the entire application package may be less than but must not exceed 110 pages. This includes but is not limited to the required Federal Standard Forms and certifications (SF-424, SF-424A, SF-424B, and Certification Regarding Lobbying), table of contents, project summary, project description, logic model, charts, budget/budget justification, supplemental documentation, proof of non-profit status, summaries of sub-grants and contracts, letters of agreement, resumes, CVs and any other pages included in the application package. All pages of the application package must be sequentially numbered, beginning with page one. All pages of each application will be counted to determine total length. All pages exceeding the 110 page limit will be removed and will not be considered in the reviewing process. A cover letter and general letters of support are not required. Applicants are reminded that if a cover letter and general letters of support are submitted, they will count towards the 110-page limit. Each applicant must organize its application in the order listed in this section and number all application pages. Pages will be counted in the order they are submitted in hard copy and numbered when received electronically. All pages that exceed the page limit will be removed and will not be reviewed. General Content and Form Information. To be considered for funding, each application must be submitted with the Standard Federal Forms and must follow the guidance provided. The application must be signed by an individual authorized to act for the applicant agency and to assume responsibility for the obligations imposed by the terms and conditions of the award. The project description must be typed and double-spaced on a single side of 8.5 x 11 inch plain white paper with a least one inch margins on all sides, using black print with 12-point size Times New Roman font. For charts, budget tables, supplemental letters and documents, applicants may use a different point size and font, but no less than 10-point size and single spaced. All copies of an application must be submitted in a single package. A separate package must be submitted for each funding opportunity. The package must be clearly labeled for the specific funding opportunity it is addressing. Because each application will be duplicated, do not use or include separate covers, binders, clips, tabs, plastic inserts, maps, brochures, or any other items that cannot be processed easily on a photocopy machine with an automatic feed. Do not bind, clip, staple, or fasten in any way separate subsections of the application, including supporting documentation. Use a clip (not a staple) to securely bind the application together. Applicants are advised that the copies of the application submitted, not the original, will be reproduced by the Federal Government for review. Tips for Preparing a Competitive Application. It is essential that applicants read the entire announcement package carefully before preparing an application and include all of the required application forms and attachments. The application must reflect a thorough understanding of and support the purpose and objectives of the applicable legislation. Reviewers expect applicants to understand the goals of the legislation and CB's interest in each topic. A "responsive application" is one that addresses and follows all of the evaluation criteria in ways that demonstrate this understanding. Applications that are considered to be "unresponsive" or do not clearly address the evaluation criteria or program requirements generally receive very low scores and are rarely funded. CB's website (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb) provides a wide range of information and links to other relevant websites. Before preparing an application, applicants can learn more about CB's mission and programs by exploring the website. Organizing the Application. Reviewers will use the specific evaluation criteria in Section V of this funding announcement to review and evaluate each application. The applicant should address each of these specific evaluation criteria in the project description. Applicants should organize their project description in this sequence: 1) Objectives and Need for Assistance; 2) Approach; 3) Evaluation; 4) Organizational Profiles; and 5) Budget and Budget Justification. The applicant must use the same headings as these criteria, so that reviewers can readily find information that directly addresses each of the specific review criteria. Logic Model. A logic model is a tool that presents the conceptual framework for a proposed project and explains the linkages among program elements. While there are many versions of the logic model, they generally summarize the logical connections among the needs that are the focus of the project, project goals and objectives, the target population, project inputs (resources), the proposed activities/processes/outputs directed toward the target population, the expected short- and long-term outcomes the initiative is designed to achieve, and the evaluation plan for measuring the extent to which proposed processes and outcomes actually occur. Information on the development of logic models is available on the Internet at http://childwelfare.gov/preventing/developing/toolkit/. Evaluation. Project evaluations are very important. If the applicant does not have the in-house capacity to conduct an objective, comprehensive evaluation of the project, then CB advises that the applicant contract with a third-party evaluator specializing in social science or evaluation, or a university or college, to conduct the evaluation. In either case, it is important that the evaluator has the necessary independence from the project to assure objectivity. A skilled evaluator can help develop a logic model and assist in designing an evaluation strategy that is rigorous and appropriate given the goals and objectives of the proposed project. Additional assistance may be found in a document titled "Program Manager's Guide to Evaluation." A copy of this document can be accessed at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/other_resrch/pm_guide_eval/reports/pmguide/pmguide_toc.html. Protection of Human Subjects. See "Certifications" later in this section. General information about the HHS Protection of Human Subjects regulations can be obtained at http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/. Applicants may also contact OHRP by email (ohrp@csophs.dhhs.gov) by phone (240-453-6900) or by Toll-Free Telephone within the U.S. (866) 447-4777. Electronic Submission. Applicants that submit their application electronically are advised to be sure that they secure and retain their service ticket number for reference whenever they have any interaction with the Grants.gov Contact Center. Non-Federal Reviewers Since ACF will be using non-Federal reviewers in the review process, applicants have the option of omitting from the application copies (not the original) specific salary rates or amounts for individuals specified in the application budget as well as Social Security Numbers, if otherwise required for individuals. The copies may include summary salary information. If applicants are submitting their application electronically, ACF will omit the same specific salary rate information from copies made for use during the review and selection process. Forms Applicants seeking financial assistance under this announcement must file the appropriate Standard Forms (SFs) as described in this section. All applicants must submit an SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance. For non-construction programs, applicants must also submit an SF-424A, Budget Information and an SF-424B, Assurances. For construction programs, applicants must also submit SF-424C, Budget Information and SF-424D, Assurances. All required Standard Forms are available at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html. Non-profit private organizations (not including private universities) are encouraged to submit the "Survey on Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Applicants" with their applications. Applicants using a hard copy application, place the completed survey in an envelope labeled "Applicant Survey." Seal the envelope and include it along with your application package. Applicants applying electronically, please submit this survey along with your application. The Survey may be found at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html. D-U-N-S Requirement All applicants must have a D&B Data Universal Numbering System (D-U-N-S) number. A D-U-N-S number is required whether an applicant is submitting a paper application or using the government-wide electronic portal, Grants.gov. A D-U-N-S number is required for every application for a new award or renewal/continuation of an award, including applications or plans under formula, entitlement, and block grant programs. A D-U-N-S number may be acquired at no cost by calling the dedicated toll-free D-U-N-S number request line at 1-866-705-5711 or you may request a number online at http://www.dnb.com. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Part I THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION OVERVIEW PURPOSE The project description provides the majority of information by which an application is evaluated and ranked in competition with other applications for available assistance. The project description should be concise and complete. It should address the activity for which Federal funds are being requested. Supporting documents should be included where they can present information clearly and succinctly. In preparing the project description, information that is responsive to each of the requested evaluation criteria must be provided. Awarding offices use this and other information in making their funding recommendations. It is important, therefore, that this information be included in the application in a manner that is clear and complete. GENERAL EXPECTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS ACF is particularly interested in specific project descriptions that focus on outcomes and convey strategies for achieving intended performance. Project descriptions are evaluated on the basis of substance and measurable outcomes, not length. Extensive exhibits are not required. Cross-referencing should be used rather than repetition. Supporting information concerning activities that will not be directly funded by the grant or information that does not directly pertain to an integral part of the grant-funded activity should be placed in an appendix. Part II GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARING A FULL PROJECT DESCRIPTION INTRODUCTION Applicants that are required to submit a full project description shall prepare the project description statement in accordance with the following instructions while being aware of the specified evaluation criteria. The text options give a broad overview of what the project description should include while the evaluation criteria identify the measures that will be used to evaluate applications. TABLE OF CONTENTS List the contents of the application including corresponding page numbers. PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT Provide a summary of the project description (one page or less) with reference to the funding request. OBJECTIVES AND NEED FOR ASSISTANCE Clearly identify the physical, economic, social, financial, institutional, and/or other problem(s) requiring a solution. The need for assistance must be demonstrated and the principal and subordinate objectives of the project must be clearly stated; supporting documentation, such as letters of support and testimonials from concerned interests other than the applicant, may be included. Any relevant data based on planning studies should be included or referred to in the endnotes/footnotes. Incorporate demographic data and participant/beneficiary information, as needed. In developing the project description, the applicant may volunteer or be requested to provide information on the total range of projects currently being conducted and supported (or to be initiated), some of which may be outside the scope of the program announcement. APPROACH Outline a plan of action that describes the scope and detail of how the proposed work will be accomplished. Account for all functions or activities identified in the application. Cite factors that might accelerate or decelerate the work and state your reason for taking the proposed approach rather than others. Describe any unusual features of the project such as design or technological innovations, reductions in cost or time, or extraordinary social and community involvement. Questions of Interest to the Children's Bureau: The following list is not intended to be exclusive, and applicants are encouraged to propose additional questions and justify their relevance. However, questions of interest to CB include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. General: What is the status of practice nationwide concerning: Utilization of GALs, attorneys, CASAs, and a combination of CASAs and attorneys; Utilization of pro bono attorneys; Adherence to practice standards; Training; Caseloads; Levels of compensation? What is currently known and what knowledge gaps exist regarding State laws and policies on the representation of children in child welfare cases? What successful strategies and promising practices are being utilized to adhere to these laws and policies? What are the chief issues and barriers preventing every child from having competent, effective representation during all court proceedings in a child welfare case? How can we evaluate competence and effectiveness in representation of children in child welfare cases? What is the source of payment for attorneys representing children and youth (e.g. Legal Services, State budget)? How much support is being provided for child representation programs from the Federal Court Improvement Program grants? What role do State bar associations play in child representation? What role should they play? Are States identifying child representation in their CFSR State Self-Assessments and including implementation of improvements in their PIPs? 2. Legal Representation: What are the characteristics and qualifications of the attorneys available to represent children in child welfare cases? What are the differences in quality of practice, effectiveness and outcomes between children represented solely by an attorney, whether using a client-directed or best interests standard, and those represented solely by a CASA? How are pro bono attorneys being utilized to represent children in child welfare cases? What, if any, is the difference in competence, effectiveness, and outcomes in cases involving representation by a pro bono attorney? How is the debate over the merits of a client-directed approach versus a best interests approach affecting the representation of children and youth? What are the barriers to the replication of the NACC certification program? What has been its impact in those States that have established the certification program? 3. Volunteer Representation: What are the characteristics of CASA workers available to represent children in child welfare cases? How are CASAs being utilized to represent children in dependency court nationwide? How effective are they? How much support is being provided for CASA programs from the Federal government? From States through the Court Improvement Program grants? 4. Effective Models of Representation of Children in Child Welfare Cases: Which models of successful child representation are in current use? Why and how are they successful? What are the factors that contribute to their success? Can differences in outcomes for cases with these models be demonstrated? What impact do these models have on placement of children in out of home care, timeliness of permanency, the rate of reunification? What are the factors to consider in successful replication of these effective models? 5. Program Implementation: What are the critical factors that support or hinder the appointment of competent and effective representation for children and youth? What strategies are being implemented currently to overcome barriers to competent and effective representation of children and youth? What are some new strategies that could be implemented to overcome these barriers? In States/jurisdictions with some effective representation programs, what are the critical factors that support or hinder the implementation and replication of the effective models Statewide? What is known about the cost-effectiveness or cost benefit of the implementation of competent and effective child representation in child welfare cases? What changes in State laws and policies would promote better representation for children and youth in child welfare cases?Provide quantitative monthly or quarterly projections of the accomplishments to be achieved for each function or activity in such terms as the number of people to be served and the number of activities accomplished. When accomplishments cannot be quantified by activity or function, list them in chronological order to show the schedule of accomplishments and their target dates. If any data is to be collected, maintained, and/or disseminated, clearance may be required from OMB. This clearance pertains to any "collection of information that is conducted or sponsored by ACF." Provide a list of organizations, cooperating entities, consultants, or other key individuals who will work on the project along with a short description of the nature of their effort or contribution. EVALUATION Provide a narrative addressing how the conduct of the project and the results of the project will be evaluated. In addressing the evaluation of results, state how you will determine the extent to which the project has achieved its stated objectives and the extent to which the accomplishment of objectives can be attributed to the project. Discuss the criteria to be used to evaluate results, and explain the methodology that will be used to determine if the needs identified and discussed are being met and if the project results and benefits are being achieved. With respect to the conduct of the project, define the procedures to be employed to determine whether the project is being conducted in a manner consistent with the work plan presented and discuss the impact of the project's various activities that address the project's effectiveness. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The following are requests for additional information that must be included in the application:
BUDGET AND BUDGET JUSTIFICATION Provide a budget with line-item detail and detailed calculations for each budget object class identified on the Budget Information Form (SF-424A or SF-424C). Detailed calculations must include estimation methods, quantities, unit costs, and other similar quantitative detail sufficient for the calculation to be duplicated. If matching is a requirement, include a breakout by the funding sources identified in Block 15 of the SF-424. Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, and allocation of the proposed costs.
(As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, P.L. 104-13, the public reporting burden for the Project Description is estimated to average 40 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection information. The Project Description information collection is approved under OMB control number 0970-0139, which expires 4/30/2010. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.) CertificationsApplicants must furnish, prior to award, an executed copy of the Certification Regarding Lobbying. Applicants must sign and return the certification with their application. If any funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan, the applicant shall complete and submit Standard Form (SF)-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. The Certification Regarding Lobbying may be found at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html. When required for programs that involve human subjects, the Protection of Human Subjects Assurance Identification/IRB Certification/Declaration of Exemption form must be submitted. All forms may be reproduced for use in submitting applications. Applicants must sign and return the appropriate standard forms with their application. The Protection of Human Subjects Assurance Identification/IRB Certification/Declaration of Exemption (Common Rule) form may be found at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html. AssurancesBy signing and submitting the application, applicants are making the appropriate certification of their compliance with all Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. The Pro-Children Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. 7183, imposes restrictions on smoking in facilities where federally funded children's services are provided. HHS grants are subject to these requirements only if they meet the Act's specified coverage. The Act specifies that smoking is prohibited in any indoor facility (owned, leased, or contracted for) used for the routine or regular provision of kindergarten, elementary, or secondary education or library services to children under the age of 18. In addition, smoking is prohibited in any indoor facility or portion of a facility (owned, leased, or contracted for) used for the routine or regular provision of federally funded health care, day care, or early childhood development, including Head Start services to children under the age of 18. The statutory prohibition also applies if such facilities are constructed, operated, or maintained with Federal funds. The statute does not apply to children's services provided in private residences, facilities funded solely by Medicare or Medicaid funds, portions of facilities used for inpatient drug or alcohol treatment, or facilities where WIC coupons are redeemed. Failure to comply with the provisions of the law may result in the imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 per violation and/or the imposition of an administrative compliance order on the responsible entity. Additional information may be found in the HHS Grants Policy Statement at: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_related.html. Electronic SubmissionApplicants to ACF may submit their applications in either electronic or paper (hard copy) format. To submit an application electronically, applicants must use the http://www.Grants.gov site. ACF will not accept applications via facsimile or email. IMPORTANT NOTE: Before submitting an application electronically, applicants must complete the organization registration process as well as obtain and register "electronic signature credentials" for the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR). Applicants also must be registered in the Central Contractor Registry (CCR). CCR registration must be updated annually. Applicants will not be able to upload an application to Grants.gov without current CCR registration and electronic signature credentials for the AOR. This process may take more than five business days, so it is important to start this process early, well in advance of the application deadline. Be sure to complete all Grants.gov registration processes listed on the Organization Registration Checklist at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/registration_checklist.html. Applicants will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it off-line, and then upload and submit the application via the Grants.gov site. If planning to submit an application electronically via http://www.Grants.gov:
After the application is submitted electronically, the applicant will receive two emails from Grants.gov:
ACF will retrieve the electronically submitted application from Grants.gov. Applicants will receive an email notification from ACF acknowledging that ACF has received the application. ACF may request that the applicant provide original signatures on forms at a later date. The Grants.gov website complies with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Grants.gov webpages are designed to work with assistive technologies such as screen readers. If an applicant uses assistive technology and is unable to access any material on the site, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at support@grants.gov for assistance. Hard Copy Submission of ApplicationsApplicants that are submitting their application in paper format should submit one original and two copies of the complete application with all attachments, unless directed otherwise. The original and each of the two copies must include all required forms, certifications, assurances, and appendices, be signed by the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR), and be unbound. The original copy of the application must have original signature(s). See Section IV.6 of this announcement for address information for application submissions. Please refer to Section VIII for a checklist of application requirements, their location and due dates that applicants may use in developing and organizing application materials. Please refer to Section IV.3 for details concerning acknowledgement of received applications. 3. Submission Dates and Times: Due Date for Applications: 06/08/2009 Explanation of Due Dates The due date for receipt of applications is referenced above. Applications received after 4:30 p.m., eastern time, on the due date will be classified as late and will not be considered in the current competition. Applicants are responsible for ensuring that applications are mailed or hand-delivered or submitted electronically well in advance of the application due date and time. Applications that are submitted by mail must be received no later than 4:30 p.m., eastern time, on the due date referenced above at the address listed in Section IV.6. Hand Delivery Applications hand carried by applicants, applicant couriers, other representatives of the applicant, or by overnight/express mail couriers must be received on or before the due date referenced above, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., eastern time, at the address referenced in Section IV.6., between Monday and Friday (excluding Federal holidays). Electronic Submission Applications submitted electronically via Grants.gov must be submitted no later than 4:30 p.m., eastern time, on the due date referenced above. ACF cannot accommodate transmission of applications by facsimile or email. Late Applications Applications that do not meet the requirements above are considered late applications. ACF shall notify each late applicant that its application will not be considered in the current competition. ANY APPLICATION RECEIVED AFTER 4:30 P.M., EASTERN TIME, ON THE DUE DATE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR COMPETITION. Extension of Deadlines ACF may extend application deadlines when circumstances such as acts of God (floods, hurricanes, etc.) occur; when there are widespread disruptions of mail service; or in other rare cases. A determination to extend or waive deadline requirements rests with the Chief Grants Management Officer. Acknowledgement of Received Application
ACF will not provide acknowledgement of receipt of hard copy application packages submitted via
mail, courier services, or by hand delivery. Applicants who submit their
application packages electronically via
http://www.Grants.gov will receive two email acknowledgements from that website:
4. Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs: State Single Point of Contact (SPOC) This program is covered under Executive Order (E.O.) 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs," and 45 CFR Part 100, "Intergovernmental Review of Department of Health and Human Services Programs and Activities". Under the Executive Order, States may design their own processes for reviewing and commenting on proposed Federal assistance under covered programs. Applicants should go to the following URL for the official list of the jurisdictions that have elected to participate in E.O. 12372 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc/. Applicants from participating jurisdictions should contact their SPOC, as soon as possible, to alert them of their prospective applications and to receive instructions on their jurisdiction's procedures. Applicants must submit all required application materials to the SPOC and indicate the date of submission on the Standard Form (SF) 424 at item 19. Under 45 CFR 100.8(a)(2), a SPOC has 60 days from the application due date to comment on proposed new awards. SPOC comments may be submitted directly to ACF to: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Grants Management, Division of Discretionary Grants, 370 L'Enfant Promenade SW., 6th Floor East, Washington, DC 20447. Entities that meet the eligibility requirements of this announcement are still eligible to apply for a grant even if a State, Territory or Commonwealth, etc., does not have a SPOC or has chosen not to participate in the process. Applicants from non-participating jurisdictions need take no action with regard to E.O. 12372. Applications from Federally-recognized Indian Tribal governments are not subject to E.O. 12372. 5. Funding Restrictions: Costs of organized fund raising, including financial campaigns, endowment drives, solicitation of gifts and bequests, and similar expenses incurred solely to raise capital or obtain contributions, are unallowable under this grant award. Grant awards will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs. Construction is not an allowable activity or expenditure under this grant award. Purchase of real property is not an allowable activity or expenditure under this grant award. 6. Other Submission Requirements: Submit applications to one of the following addresses: Submission by Mail ACYF Operations Centerc/o The Dixon Group, Inc. ATTN: Children's Bureau 118 Q St., NE Washington, DC 20002-2132 Hand Delivery ACYF Operations Centerc/o The Dixon Group, Inc. ATTN: Children's Bureau 118 Q St., NE Washington, DC 20002-2132 Electronic Submission See Section IV.2 for application requirements and for guidance when submitting applications electronically via http://www.Grants.gov. For all submissions, see Section IV.3 for information on due dates. V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION 1. CRITERIA: In considering how applicants will carry out the responsibilities addressed under this announcement, competing applications for financial assistance will be reviewed and evaluated against the following criteria:
In reviewing the objectives and need for assistance, reviewers will consider the extent to which:
In reviewing the approach, reviewers will consider the extent to which: 1. There is a sound timeline for effectively implementing the proposed project, including major milestones and target dates and the proposed project would complete all the activities described in this funding announcement within the five-year project time frame. 2. The overall design and strategies proposed by the QIC demonstrates an understanding of the issues involved in the representation of children in child welfare cases, and an understanding of the existing knowledge base on the effective models currently being utilized. 3. The application demonstrates an understanding of the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) process and results. The proposed project would support and coordinate with the relevant Program Improvement Plans (PIPs), as appropriate. 4. The project would address safety, permanency and well-being outcomes. 5. The application proposes a National Advisory Committee that includes: (a) representatives of the key federal, national, and state organizations that are most actively working on issues related to this overall topic; (b) membership that reflects the cultural and ethnic diversity of the communities to be served; and (c) members who have the expertise and managerial skills appropriate to National Advisory Committee membership. 6. The plan for conducting the comprehensive literature review and needs analysis is: (a) appropriate and feasible; (b) likely to result in the development of a comprehensive description and assessment of the practice models of child representation; (c) likely to identify best practices and promising practice models for implementing competent and effective child representation; and (d) likely to identify knowledge gaps and barriers. 7. The proposed strategy for refining the focus for the QIC during the planning year involves input from a wide range of stakeholders, including key Federal, national, regional, State, and local courts, agencies and organizations. 8. The proposed preliminary design for Phase II: Implementation Plan (Version A): a) Demonstrates that the implementation plan would be developed in a manner that is likely to result in the timely production of a plan that is feasible and appropriate and includes input from a wide range of relevant sources. b) Presents an appropriate and feasible approach for creating an administrative structure for selecting research and demonstration projects and certification candidates. c) Presents an appropriate and feasible plan for providing technical assistance to prospective candidates to assist them in designing and proposing initiatives that meet the standards for research and demonstration projects supported under this initiative. d) Presents an appropriate and feasible plan for providing support, guidance, and technical assistance to projects to assist them in project implementation, data collection and evaluation. e) Presents an appropriate and feasible plan, including appropriate plans for project accountability, for constructing an administrative and management structure that ensures that projects are implemented within 90 days of their selection by the QIC and that monitors and manages projects supported under this initiative. f) Presents a feasible and appropriate approach to the formation of a consortium and information-sharing network consisting of partnerships with and among sites of selected projects, the lawyers certified as specialists in child welfare law sponsored by the QIC, and the National Advisory Committee. g) Presents feasible and appropriate strategies for information dissemination, including fostering and strengthening communication and coordination activities with members of CB's Training and Technical Assistance Network. h) Identifies and addresses the conceptual, management, and logistical issues involved in developing and implementing the QIC-sponsored research and demonstration projects. i) Presents a clear and comprehensive vision of how the proposed QIC would operate once projects and lawyers to be certified are selected. 9. The extent to which there would be an effective administrative and organizational interface between the applicant and key partners, and the application includes appropriate letters of commitment from these partner organizations. 10. There is a sound plan for developing useful products during the proposed project and a reasonable schedule for developing these products; the intended audience (e.g., researchers, policymakers, lawyers and courts) for product dissemination is comprehensive and appropriate; and the dissemination plan includes appropriate mechanisms and forums that would effectively convey the information and support successful replication by other interested courts and organizations.
In reviewing the evaluation plan, reviewers will consider the extent to which:
a. The proposed evaluation plan would be likely to yield data that can be compared to and contrasted with regional, State and national level CFSR data. b. The proposed evaluation plan would measure the effects of the proposed implementation of the proposed project on safety, permanency and well-being. c. In addition to measuring OSRI items where appropriate, the proposed evaluation plan will also measure other outcomes of value to the child welfare field.
In reviewing the organizational profiles, reviewers will consider the extent to which:
In reviewing the budget and budget justification, reviewers will consider the extent to which:
2. Review and Selection Process: No grant award will be made under this announcement on the basis of an incomplete application. Initial ACF Screening: Each application will be screened to determine whether it was received by the closing date and time and whether the requested amount exceeds the stated ceiling. Late applications or those exceeding the funding limit will be returned to the applicants with a notation that they were unacceptable and will not be reviewed. A panel of at least three reviewers (primarily experts from outside the Federal Government) will use the evaluation criteria described in this announcement to evaluate each application (see Section IV.2 Non-Federal Reviewers). The reviewers will determine the strengths and weaknesses of each application, provide comments about the strengths and weaknesses, and give each application a numerical score. The results of the competitive review are a primary factor in making funding decisions. In addition, Federal staff conducts administrative reviews of the applications and, in light of the results of the competitive review, will recommend applications for funding to the ACYF Commissioner. ACYF may also solicit and consider comments from ACF Regional Office staff in making funding decisions. ACYF may take into consideration the programmatic involvement of the private sector, national, or State or community organizations or the potential for high benefit from low Federal investment. ACYF may elect not to fund any applicants having known management, fiscal, reporting, programmatic, or other problems that make it unlikely that they would be able to provide effective services or effectively complete the proposed activity. With the results of the peer review and the information from Federal staff, the Commissioner of ACYF makes the final funding decisions. The Commissioner may give special consideration to applications proposing services of special interest to the Federal Government and to achieve geographic distributions of grant awards. Applications of special interest may include, but are not limited to, applications focusing on underserved or inadequately served clients or service areas and programs addressing diverse ethnic populations. Approved but Unfunded Applications Applications that are approved but unfunded may be held over for funding in the next funding cycle, pending the availability of funds, for a period not to exceed one year. 3. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates: Applications will be reviewed during the Summer 2009. Grant awards will have a start date no later than September 30, 2009. VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION 1. Award Notices: Successful applicants will be notified through the issuance of a Notice of Award (NoA) document that sets forth the amount of funds granted, the terms and conditions of the grant, the effective date of the grant, the budget period for which initial support will be given, the non-Federal share to be provided (if applicable), and the total project period for which support is contemplated. The NoA will be signed by the Grants Officer and transmitted via postal mail. Following the finalization of funding decisions, organizations whose applications will not be funded will be notified by letter, signed by the Program Office head. 2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: Grantees are subject to the administrative requirements in 45 CFR Part 74 (for non-governmental entities) or 45 CFR Part 92 (for governmental entities). Direct Federal grants, sub-award funds, or contracts under this ACF program shall not be used to support inherently religious activities such as religious instruction, worship, or proselytization. Therefore, organizations must take steps to separate, in time or location, their inherently religious activities from the services funded under this program. Regulations pertaining to the Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations, which includes the prohibition against Federal funding of inherently religious activities, can be found at the HHS web site at: http://www.hhs.gov/fbci/waisgate21.pdf. A faith-based organization receiving HHS funds retains its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, and may continue to carry out its mission, including the definition, practice, and expression of its religious beliefs. For example, a faith-based organization may use space in its facilities to provide secular programs or services funded with Federal funds without removing religious art, icons, scriptures, or other religious symbols. In addition, a faith-based organization that receives Federal funds retains its authority over its internal governance, and it may retain religious terms in its organization's name, select its board members on a religious basis, and include religious references in its organization's mission statements and other governing documents in accordance with all program requirements, statutes, and other applicable requirements governing the conduct of HHS funded activities. Additional information on "Understanding the Regulations Related to the Faith-Based and Community Initiative" can be found at: http://www.hhs.gov/fbci/regulations/index.html. HHS Grants Policy Statement The HHS Grants Policy Statement (GPS) is the Department of Health and Human Services new single policy guide for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements. Unlike previous HHS policy documents, the GPS is intended to be shared with and used by grantees. It became effective October 1, 2006 and is applicable to all Operating Divisions (OPDIVS), such as the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), except the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The GPS covers basic grants processes, standard terms and conditions, and points of contact, as well as important OPDIV-specific requirements. Appendices include a glossary of terms and a list of standard abbreviations for ease of reference. The GPS may be accessed at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_related.html. 3. Reporting Requirements: Grantees will be required to submit performance progress and financial reports periodically throughout the project period. Frequency of reporting is listed later in this section. Beginning with FY 2009 awards, most ACF grantees will begin using the a Standard Form (SF) for required performance progress reporting (PPR). The SF-PPR is a standard government-wide performance progress reporting format consisting of a series of forms implemented by Federal agencies to collect performance information from award recipients. Most ACF grantees will begin using the standard format implemented through ACF's Office of Grants Management (OGM), entitled the "ACF-OGM-SF-PPR." Use of the ACF-OGM-SF-PPR will begin for new awards and continuation awards made by ACF in FY 2009. At a minimum, grantees will be required to submit the ACF-OGM-SF-PPR, which consists of the ACF-OGM-SF-PPR Coversheet and the ACF-OGM-SF-PPR Appendix B Program Indicators. ACF Programs that utilize other SF-PPR reporting formats, or other reporting forms or formats that differ from the new ACF-OGM-SF-PPR, have listed those forms or formats below. Grant award documents will inform grantees of the appropriate performance progress report form or format to use beginning in FY 2009. Grantees will continue to use the Financial Status Report (FSR) SF-269 (long form) for required financial reporting. The SF-269 (long form) and the ACF-OGM-SF-PPR may be found at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/grants/grants_resources.html. Grantees should consult their award documents to determine the appropriate performance progress report format required under their award. Performance progress and financial reports are due 30 days after the end of the reporting period. Final program performance and financial reports are due 90 days after the close of the project period. Final reports may be submitted in hard copy to the Grants Management Office Contact listed in Section VII. of this announcement. Program Progress Reports: Semi-AnnuallyFinancial Reports: Semi-Annually VII. AGENCY CONTACTS Program Office Contact: Emily Cooke
For hearing or speech impaired callers, contact the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339
(TTY (Text Telephone) / ASCII (American Standard Code For Information Interchange)).
Grants Management Office Contact: Ben Sharp, Grants Officer
For hearing or speech impaired callers, contact the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339
(TTY (Text Telephone) / ASCII (American Standard Code For Information Interchange)).
VIII. OTHER INFORMATION Additional information about this program and its purpose can be located on the following website: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/ For general information regarding this announcement please contact:
ACYF Operations Center Email: cb@dixongroup.com Checklist You may use the checklist below as a guide when preparing your application package.
Posted on April 7, 2009 |
||
