Browse: Departments   Dates   Agencies  

STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE

Treasury Department

NOTICE: Part II

DOCUMENT ACTION: Final grant guideline.

SUBJECT CATEGORY: Grant Guideline

EFFECTIVE DATES: December 1, 2003.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY: This Guideline sets forth the administrative, programmatic, and financial requirements attendant to Fiscal Year 2004 State Justice Institute grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts.

SUMMARY: State Justice Institute,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Pursuant to the State Justice Institute Act of 1984, 42 U.S.C. 10701, et seq., as amended, the Institute is authorized to award grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts to State and local courts, nonprofit organizations, and others for the purpose of improving the quality of justice in the State courts of the United States.

This Guideline is being published at a time when the Institute is operating on a Continuing Resolution (CR). The Guideline is contingent on further action by Congress to either extend the CR or enact an appropriations bill funding the Institute in FY 2004 at no less than the level approved by the House of Representatives ($3 million). Types of Grants Available and Funding Schedules

SJI will offer five types of grants in FY 2004: Project Grants, Technical Assistance (TA) Grants, Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance (JBE TA) Grants, Continuation Grants, and Scholarships.

Project Grants. Project Grants are awarded to support innovative education, research, demonstration, and technical assistance projects that can improve the administration of justice in State courts nationwide. As provided in section V.C. of the Guideline, Project Grants may ordinarily not exceed $150,000 a year; however, grants in excess of $100,000 are likely to be rare, and awarded only to support projects likely to have a significant national impact.

SJI also awards ``think piece'' Project Grants to support the development of essays of publishable quality that explore emerging issues that could result in significant changes in court processes or judicial administration. ``Think pieces'' are limited to no more than $10,000. See section II.B.

Special Interest Categories. Project Grants, including ``think piece'' grants, will be awarded only for projects that fall within one of the Guideline's five Special Interest categories: Access to the Courts, Application of Technology in the Courts, Children and Families in Court, Judicial Branch Education, and the Relationship Between State and Federal Courts. The Judicial Branch Education category now includes specific topics of interest pertaining to rape, sexual assault, and other sexual violence, as a result of an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Justice's Office on Violence Against Women. See section II.A.4.

The deadline for submitting a Project Grant application is February 13, 2004. The Board of Directors will meet in early May 2004 to approve grant awards. See section VI.A. for Project Grant application procedures.

Technical Assistance Grants. Section II.C. reserves up to $300,000 for Technical Assistance Grants. Under this program, a State or local court may receive a grant of up to $30,000 to engage outside experts to provide technical assistance to diagnose, develop, and implement a response to a jurisdiction's problems.

Letters of application for a Technical Assistance Grant may be submitted at any time. Applicants submitting letters by January 9, 2004 will be notified by April 2, 2004; those submitting letters between January 10 and February 27, 2004 will be notified by June 11, 2004; those submitting letters between February 28 and June 4, 2004 will be notified by August 27, 2004; and those submitting letters between June 5 and September 24, 2004 will be notified of the Board's decision by December 10, 2004. See section VI.D. for Technical Assistance Grant application procedures.

Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants. Section II.A.4.b. of the Guideline allocates up to $150,000 for grants under the JBE TA grant program this year. Grants of up to $20,000 are available to: (1) enable a State or local court to adapt and deliver an education program that was previously developed and evaluated under an SJI project grant (i.e., curriculum adaptation); and/or (2) support expert consultation in planning, developing, and administering State judicial branch education programs.

The services available through the expanded program could include consultant assistance in maintaining judicial branch education programming during the current budget crisis, or development of improved methods for evaluating judicial branch education programs. Letters requesting JBE TA Grants may be submitted at any time. The grant cycles for JBE TA Grants are the same as the grant cycles for TA Grants:

Applicants submitting letters by January 9, 2004 will be notified by April 2, 2004; those submitting letters between January 10 and February 27, 2004 will be notified by June 11, 2004; those submitting letters between February 28 and June 4, 2004 will be notified by August 27, 2004; and those submitting letters between June 5 and September 24, 2004 will be notified of the Board's decision by December 10, 2004. See section VI.E. for JBE TA Grant application procedures.

Scholarships. Section II.A.4.c. of the Guideline allocates up to $200,000 of FY 2004 funds for scholarships to enable judges and court managers to attend outofState education and training programs. A scholarship of up to $1,500 may be awarded to pay for a recipient's travel and tuition costs and, new this year, reasonable lodging costs.

Scholarships for eligible applicants are approved largely on a ``first come, first served'' basis, although the Institute may approve or disapprove scholarship requests in order to achieve appropriate balances on the basis of geography, program provider, and type of court or applicant (e.g., trial judge, appellate judge, trial court administrator). Scholarships will be approved only for programs that either (1) address topics included in the Guideline's Special Interest categories (section II.A.); (2) enhance the skills of judges and court managers; or (3) are part of a graduate degree program for judges or court personnel.

Applicants interested in obtaining a scholarship for a program beginning between April 1 and June 30, 2004 must submit their applications and documents between January 5 and March 1, 2004. For programs beginning between July 1 and September 30, 2004, the applications and documents must be submitted between April 5 and May 31, 2004. For programs beginning between October 1 and December 31, 2004, the applications and documents must be submitted between July 6 and August 30, 2004. For programs beginning between January 1 and March 31, 2005, the applications and documents must be submitted between October 4 and November 29, 2004. See section VI.F. for Scholarship application procedures.

Continuation Grants. Continuation Grants (See sections III.D., V.B.2., and VI.C.) are intended to enhance the specific program or service begun during the initial project grant period. The Guideline establishes a firm limit
[[Page 67269]]
for Continuation Grants of 20% of the total amount projected to be available for all Project Grants in FY 2004. Grantees should accordingly be aware that the award of a grant to support a project does not constitute a commitment to provide continuation funding. No grant awarded in FY 2004 will be continued for more than five years.

An applicant for a Continuation Grant must submit a letter notifying the Institute of its intent to seek such funding no later than 120 days before the end of the current grant period. The Institute will then notify the applicant of the deadline for its Continuation Grant application.

Matching Requirements

With the exception of JBE TA grantees, grantees that can demonstrate a financial hardship, and Scholarship recipients, all grantees must provide match, including cash match, for any Institute grant. The matching requirements are summarized below:

State and local units of government. The Guideline requires these grantees to provide matching support equal to 50% of a new SJIfunded project. For example, if a State court system receives a $100,000 grant from the Institute, it must provide a $50,000 match. A State or local unit of government must provide at least 20% of the required match for a new grant ($10,000 in the example) in the form of cash rather than inkind support (e.g., the value of staff time contributed to the project).

All other grantees. All other grantees must contribute a match of 25% to a new SJIfunded project. For example, if a nonprofit organization receives a $100,000 grant from SJI, it must provide a $25,000 match. A nonprofit must provide at least 10% of the required match for a new grant ($2,500 in the example) in the form of cash.

The amount and nature of unrequired match contributed by applicants will continue to be factors the Board of Directors considers in making grant decisions. Applicants may request a waiver of the match requirement, the cash match requirement, or both. See section VIII.A.8.c.

Continuation Grants. Under section VIII.A.8., all grantees are required to assume a greater share of project support over time. State and local units of government are required to provide match equaling at least 50% of the amount provided by SJI in the first year of the project, 60% in the second year, 75% in the third year, 90% in the fourth year, and 100% in the fifth year. For example, if SJI awards a State court $100,000 for the first year of a grant, the court would be required to provide $50,000 in match. If the secondyear grant is also $100,000, the court would be required to provide $60,000 in match. A court that wished to limit its secondyear contribution to $50,000 could ask SJI for a reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 60% requirement.

All other grantees must provide match equaling at least 25% of the amount provided by SJI in the first year of the project, 30% in the second year, 37.5% in the third year, 45% in the fourth year, and 50% in the fifth year. For example, if SJI awards a nonprofit organization $100,000 for the first year of a grant, the organization would be required to provide $25,000 in match. If the second year grant is also $100,000, the court would be required to provide $30,000 in match. An organization that wished to limit its secondyear contribution to $25,000 could ask SJI for a reduced amount, i.e., $83,333, in order to meet the 30% requirement.

Absent extraordinary circumstances, no SJI grant awarded in FY 2004 will continue for more than five years.

Solutions Project

In FY 2003, the Institute allocated approximately $800,000 to support the Solutions Project, a process that will draw on State and local court initiatives to identify and exchange promising solutions to the most critical problems facing the courts, and define a national agenda to improve the quality of justice in State courts nationwide.

Nearly $400,000 of the allocation was awarded in amounts up to $20,000 to 20 States. A list of the States receiving those grants and a description of their projects may be found on the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org). At its meeting in November, the Board approved the remaining $400,000 of FY 2003 money (as well as a conditional grant of $400,000 from FY 2004 money) for a National Solutions Project that will be carried out under a cooperative agreement among SJI, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), and the Center for Effective Public Policy (CEPP).

The National Project will include five phases:
(1) Definition of key problem areas. Project staff will identify five priority areas of focus by reviewing the professional literature, drawing on the 20 States' experiences with their Solutions Project grants, surveying the members of the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA), convening a focus group of COSCA members, and consulting with the project advisory committee.
(2) Identification and synthesis of information on solutions. Staff will identify and catalog existing information on solutions to the five problem areas selected, then seek additional solutions from COSCA members, NCSC's Knowledge and Information Service, JERITT, and other court support organizations. This information will be supplemented by the experiences of the Project's technical assistance sites and ``community of practice'' members (see 35 below). Staff will create and maintain a current catalog of solutions and resources, and prepare practice briefs for each of the five focus topics.
(3) Technical assistance (TA) to implement solutions. The Project will provide onsite TA to help implement solutions in an anticipated 40 courts or court systems. The application process for obtaining TA will be announced shortly.
(4) Intensive technical assistance to partner courts. Five partner courts will be selected for intensive TA to be provided by CEPP. Intensive TA will require the host court to enter into a partnership with CEPP by committing significant leadership resources and staff time to the effort. Intensive TA will include a quarterly onsite visit over the course of a year, expert consultant services in the focus area, assistance in forming a ``court working team'' to lead the implementation effort, a fullday retreat for the team, team members' attendance at a national workshop for the intensive sites, and membership in a national ``community of practice'' including web conferences and other online services.
(5) Information dissemination. NCSC will establish a Solutions web page on its Internet site that will be accessible through other court related Web sites, host the national communities of practice, and periodically update the national court community about Project developments. The communities of practice will enable court practitioners working in a specific area to share their experiences and knowledge with each other.

Response to Comments

Of the 11 comments received, 8 addressed the Proposed Guideline's intent to reduce the allocations reserved for the Institute's 3 small grant programs: TA Grants, JBE TA Grants, and Scholarships. On the basis of the comments, the Final Guideline restores the allocations for the TA Grant program and Scholarships to their prior levels ($300,000 and $200,000, respectively). In response to a comment, the Board of Directors also approved expanding the
[[Page 67270]]
use of SJI scholarship funds to include reasonable lodging costs. See section VI.F.

In addition, the Final Guideline adopts the proposed policy to exempt recipients of JBE TA Grants from the requirement to provide cash match.

Recommendations to Grantwriters

Recommendations to Grantwriters may be found in Appendix A.

The following Grant Guideline is adopted by the State Justice Institute for FY 2004:
Table of Contents
I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute
II. Scope of the Program
III. Definitions
IV. Eligibility for Award
V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of Awards
VI. Applications
VII. Application Review Procedures
VIII. Compliance Requirements
IX. Financial Requirements
X. Grant Adjustments

Appendix ARecommendations to Grant Writers

Appendix BAnswers to Grantees' Frequently Asked Questions

Appendix CSJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts

Appendix DIllustrative List of Technical Assistance Grants

Appendix EIllustrative List of Model Curricula

Appendix FState Justice Institute Application (Forms A, B, C, C1, D, and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities)

Appendix GLineItem Budget Form (Form E)

Appendix HScholarship Application Forms (Forms S1 and S2) I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute

The Institute was established by Pub. L. 98620 to improve the administration of justice in the State courts of the United States. Incorporated in the State of Virginia as a private, nonprofit corporation, the Institute is charged, by statute, with the responsibility to:
[sbull] Direct a national program of financial assistance designed to assure that each citizen of the United States is provided ready access to a fair and effective system of justice;
[sbull] Foster coordination and cooperation with the Federal judiciary;
[sbull] Promote recognition of the importance of the separation of powers doctrine to an independent judiciary; and
[sbull] Encourage education for judges and support personnel of State court systems through national and State organizations, including universities.

To accomplish these broad objectives, the Institute is authorized to provide funds to State courts, national organizations which support and are supported by State courts, national judicial education organizations, and other organizations that can assist in improving the quality of justice in the State courts.

The Institute is supervised by an 11member Board of Directors appointed by the President, with the consent of the Senate. The Board is statutorily composed of six judges, a State court administrator, and four members of the public, no more than two of whom can be of the same political party.

Through the award of grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements, the Institute is authorized to perform the following activities:

A. Support research, demonstrations, special projects, technical assistance, and training to improve the administration of justice in the State courts;

B. Provide for the preparation, publication, and dissemination of information regarding State judicial systems;

C. Participate in joint projects with Federal agencies and other private grantors;

D. Evaluate or provide for the evaluation of programs and projects funded by the Institute to determine their impact upon the quality of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice and the extent to which they have contributed to improving the quality of justice in the State courts;

E. Encourage and assist in furthering judicial education;

F. Encourage, assist, and serve in a consulting capacity to State and local justice system agencies in the development, maintenance, and coordination of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice programs and services; and

G. Be responsible for the certification of national programs that are intended to aid and improve State judicial systems.

II. Scope of the Program

As set forth in Section I., the Institute is authorized to fund projects addressing a broad range of program areas. However, during FY 2004, the Institute will consider applications for funding support that address only the topics included in the following five program categories designated by the Board as being of special interest. Funds will not be made available for the ordinary, routine operation of court systems or programs in any of these areas.

A. Special Interest Program Categories

The Institute is interested in funding both innovative programs and programs of proven merit that can be replicated in other jurisdictions. The Institute is especially interested in funding projects that: [sbull] Formulate new procedures and techniques, or creatively enhance existing procedures and techniques;
[sbull] Address aspects of the State judicial systems that are in special need of serious attention;
[sbull] Have national significance by developing products, services, and techniques that may be used in other States; and [sbull] Create and disseminate products that effectively transfer the information and ideas developed to relevant audiences in State and local judicial systems, or provide technical assistance to facilitate the adaptation of effective programs and procedures in other State and local jurisdictions.

A project will be identified as a Special Interest project if it meets the four criteria set forth above and it falls within the scope of the Special Interest program categories designated below.

The Board has designated the areas set forth below as Special Interest program categories. The order of listing does not imply any ordering of priorities among the categories. For a complete list of projects supported in previous years in each of these categories, please visit the Institute's Internet homepage at http://www.statejustice.org/ and click on Grants by Category.

1. Access to the Courts

This category includes demonstration, evaluation, research, and education projects designed to improve the responsiveness of courts to public concerns regarding the fairness, accessibility, timeliness, and comprehensibility of the court process.

The Institute is particularly interested in supporting innovative projects that:
[sbull] Test and evaluate approaches permitting selfrepresented litigants to file pleadings, responses, and other forms electronically; [sbull] Test and evaluate new approaches to enhance public access to the courts, including demonstrations of innovative collaborative efforts between courts and community institutions (e.g., bar associations, legal service agencies, schools, and public libraries) to enhance access to the courts by people without lawyers (in this regard, however, Institute funds may not be used to directly or indirectly support legal representation of individuals in specific cases); and [[Page 67271]]
[sbull] Develop and test a range of strategies, methodologies, guidelines, and outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of programs established to assist people without lawyers.

2. Application of Technology in the Courts

This category includes the testing of innovative applications of technology to improve the operation of court management systems and judicial practices at both the trial and appellate court levels. The Institute seeks to support local experiments with promising but untested applications of technology in the courts that include an evaluation of the impact of the technology in terms of costs, benefits, and staff workload, and a training component to assure that staff is appropriately educated about the purpose and use of the new technology. In this context, ``untested'' includes novel applications of technology developed for the private sector that have not previously been applied in the courts.

The Institute is particularly interested in supporting efforts to test and evaluate technologies that would:
[sbull] Test and evaluate approaches permitting selfrepresented litigants to file pleadings, responses, and other forms electronically; [sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the delivery of technology to rural courts through an Internetbased ``application service provider'' approach;
[sbull] Evaluate approaches for electronically filing pleadings, briefs, and other documents; approaches to integrate electronic filing and electronic document management; and the impact of electronic court record systems on case management and court procedures;
[sbull] Test and evaluate the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) software as a means of examining and improving courts' outreach to particular segments of the communities they serve;
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the use of expert system technology to assist judicial decisionmaking; and
[sbull] Evaluate innovative applications of technology designed to ensure the safety of all who use and work in the courts.

3. Children and Families in Court

This category includes education, demonstration, evaluation, technical assistance, and research projects to identify and inform judges of innovative, effective approaches for handling cases involving children and families. The Institute is particularly interested in projects that would:
[sbull] Test and evaluate different approaches to managing and adjudicating domestic violence cases, including domestic violence courts; integrated case management information systems; collaborations among courts, law enforcement agencies, social service agencies, women's shelters, victims support and advocacy organizations, and others; and other innovative practices intended to improve the courts' response to domestic violence.
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate innovative approaches to manage and coordinate cases and proceedings involving multiple members of the same family;
[sbull] Demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of a ``one social worker/one family'' or judgesocial worker team approach to handling child abuse and neglect cases;
[sbull] Develop and test innovative protocols, procedures, educational programs, and other measures to address the service needs of children exposed to family violence and the methods for mitigating those effects when issuing protection, custody, visitation, or other orders;
[sbull] Educate judges about how to interpret and evaluate evidence presented by psychologists, psychiatrists, and other professionals appearing in child custody and visitation cases involving domestic violence between the parents;
[sbull] Develop and test the implementation of a differentiated case management system for handling child custody disputes; [sbull] Develop and evaluate educational programs addressing a collaborative community approach to reducing and preventing domestic violence for a multidisciplinary audience that includes judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, victim advocates, doctors, and social services providers;
[sbull] Evaluate the impact of court policies and procedures and collaborative community approaches designed to ensure that juvenile sex offenders have access to an appropriate array of services; and [sbull] Create and test educational programs, guidelines, and monitoring systems to assure that the juvenile justice system meets the needs of girls and children of color.

Institute funds may not be used to provide operational support to programs offering direct services or compensation to victims of crimes. (Applicants interested in obtaining such operational support should contact the Office for Victims of Crime [OVC], Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, or the agency in their State that awards OVC funds to State and local victim assistance and compensation programs.)

4. Judicial Branch Education

The Institute is interested in supporting projects that will continue to strengthen and broaden the availability of court education programs at the State, regional, and national levels. This category is divided into three subsections: (a) Innovative Educational Programs; (b) Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Projects; and (c) Scholarships.

a. Innovative Educational Programs. This category includes support for the development and pilottesting of innovative, highquality educational programs for trial and appellate judges or court personnel that address key issues of concern to the nation's courts, or help local courts or State court systems develop or enhance their capacity to deliver quality continuing education.

Programs may be designed for presentation at the local, State, regional, or national level. Ordinarily, court education programs should be based on an assessment of the needs of the target audience; include clearly stated learning objectives that delineate the new knowledge or skills participants will acquire (as opposed to a description of what will be taught); incorporate adult education principles and multiple teaching/learning methods; and result in the development of a curriculum as defined in section III.E.

The Institute is particularly interested in supporting the development of programs that:
[sbull] Educate judges and court personnel about how to design and sustain problemsolving courts;
[sbull] Educate State court judges, law clerks, and staff counsel about capital case law, DNA evidence, and other legal and scientific issues related to the trial and appeal of capital cases;
[sbull] Educate State court judges and court personnel about special problems related to the adjudication of capital cases, including jury voir dire, jury sequestration, sentencing hearings, court security, and media management; and
[sbull] Develop and test curricula and materials designed to familiarize judges and court managers with the need for and key elements of effective assistance programs for people without lawyers, and the resources required to sustain them.

In addition, pursuant to an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Justice's Office on Violence Against Women, the Board is reserving approximately $800,000 to
[[Page 67272]]
support judicial branch education programs addressing rape and other sexual violence. In particular, the Institute is interested in projects that will:
[sbull] Develop, test, and evaluate inperson training and Internetbased or other distancelearning curricula on rape and sexual assault for State court judges;
[sbull] Adapt or replicate a judicial branch education curriculum about rape and sexual violence designed for a national or regional audience for presentation at the State or local level; and
[sbull] Educate judges about the unique characteristics of juvenile sex offenders and the specialized array of ageappropriate services they require to control their abusive behavior.

b. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Projects. The Board is reserving up to $150,000 to support technical assistance and onsite consultation in planning, developing, and administering comprehensive and specialized State judicial branch education programs, as well as the adaptation of model curricula previously developed with SJI funds.

The goals of the Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Program (JBE TA) in FY 2004 are to:
(1) Provide State and local courts with the opportunity to access expert strategic assistance to enable them to maintain judicial branch education programming during the current budget crisis; and (2) Enable courts to modify a model curriculum, course module, or conference program developed with SJI funds to meet a particular State's or local jurisdiction's educational needs; train instructors to present portions or all of the curriculum; and pilottest it to determine its appropriateness, quality, and effectiveness. An illustrative but noninclusive list of the curricula that may be appropriate for adaptation is contained in Appendix E.

Only State or local courts may apply for JBE TA funding. Application procedures may be found in Section VI.E. State and local courts are not required to contribute cash match to JBE TA grants.

c. Scholarships for Judges and Court Managers. The Institute is reserving up to $200,000 to support a scholarship program for State judges and court managers. The purposes of the scholarship program are to:
[sbull] Enhance the skills, knowledge, and abilities of judges and court managers;
[sbull] Enable State court judges and court managers to attend out ofState educational programs sponsored by national and State providers that they could not otherwise attend because of limited State, local, and personal budgets; and
[sbull] Provide States, judicial educators, and the Institute with evaluative information on a range of judicial and courtrelated education programs.

Scholarships will be granted to individuals only for the purpose of attending an outofState educational program within the United States. Application procedures may be found in Section VI.F.

5. The Relationship Between State and Federal Courts

This category includes education, research, demonstration, and evaluation projects designed to facilitate appropriate and effective communication, cooperation, and coordination between State and Federal courts.

The Institute is particularly interested in innovative projects that:
[sbull] Evaluate State and Federal courts' experiences with capital cases to identify reasons for reversals of trial court convictions, barriers to timely disposition, and steps that can be taken to minimize reversals and undue delay;
[sbull] Educate judges about capital case law, DNA evidence, and judicial administration issues arising from death penalty cases, e.g., court security, jury sequestration, and media management;
[sbull] Establish standards for selecting qualified appointed defense counsel in capital cases, and evaluating different appointment approaches;
[sbull] Support commissions that involve members of the judiciary in reviewing and remedying errors that led to wrongful convictions in death penalty cases;
[sbull] Coordinate and process mass tort cases fairly and efficiently at the trial and appellate levels;
[sbull] Provide assistance to courts in developing plans to continue operations in the wake of a catastrophic incident, including establishing lines of succession; and
[sbull] Develop effective emergency responses to acts of terrorism. B. ``Think Pieces''

This category addresses the development of essays of publishable quality directed to the court community. The essays should explore emerging issues that could result in significant changes in court process or judicial administration and their implications for the future for judges, court managers, policymakers, and the public. Grants supporting such projects are limited to no more than $10,000. Applicants should follow the procedures explained in section VI.B. of this Guideline.

Think piece topics are limited to the five Special Interest categories listed in section II.A. of this Guideline. In particular, the Institute is interested in supporting the development of essays on: [sbull] Issues related to the institutionalization and maintenance of drug and other problemsolving courts, e.g., maintaining budgets in fiscally constrained times, finding new sources of money, identifying and selecting new judges while still maintaining the focus of the court and enthusiasm for the concept;
[sbull] What the courts have learned from problemsolving approaches that can be applied throughout the court system to enhance public trust and confidence; and
[sbull] The advantages, disadvantages, and appropriate use of anonymous juries.

C. Technical Assistance Grants

The Board will set aside up to $300,000 to support the provision of technical assistance to State and local courts. The program is designed to provide State and local courts with sufficient support to obtain technical assistance to diagnose a problem, develop a response to that problem, and implement any needed changes. The Institute will reserve sufficient funds each quarter to assure the availability of Technical Assistance Grants throughout the year.

Technical Assistance Grants are limited to no more than $30,000 each, and may cover the cost of obtaining the services of expert consultants; travel by a team of officials from one court to examine a practice, program, or facility in another jurisdiction that the applicant court is interested in replicating; or both. Normally, the technical assistance must be completed within 12 months after the start date of the grant.

Only a State or local court may apply for a Technical Assistance grant. The application procedures may be found in section VI.D. III. Definitions

The following definitions apply for the purposes of this Guideline: A. Acknowledgment of SJI Support

The prominent display of the SJI logo on the front cover of a written product or in the opening frames of a videotape developed with Institute support, and inclusion of a brief statement on the inside front cover or title page of the document or the opening frames of the videotape identifying the grant number.
[[Page 67273]]
See section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for the precise wording of the statement. B. Application

A formal request for an Institute grant. A complete application consists of: Form AApplication; Form BCertificate of State Approval (for applications from local trial or appellate courts or agencies); Form CProject Budget/Tabular Format or Form C1Project Budget/ Spreadsheet Format; Form DAssurances; Disclosure of Lobbying Activities; a detailed 25page description of the need for the project and all related tasks, including the time frame for completion of each task, and staffing requirements; and a detailed budget narrative that provides the basis for all costs. See section VI. for a complete description of application submission requirements. See Appendix F for the Project Grant application forms.

C. Closeout

The process by which the Institute determines that all applicable administrative and financial actions and all required grant work have been completed by both the grantee and the Institute.

D. Continuation Grant

A grant lasting no longer than 15 months to permit completion of activities initiated under an existing Institute grant or enhancement of the products or services produced during the prior grant period. See section VI.C. for a complete description of continuation application requirements.

E. Curriculum

The materials needed to replicate an education or training program developed with grant funds including, but not limited to: The learning objectives; the presentation methods; a sample agenda or schedule; an outline of presentations and relevant instructors' notes; copies of overhead transparencies or other visual aids; exercises, case studies, hypotheticals, quizzes, and other materials for involving the participants; background materials for participants; evaluation forms; and suggestions for replicating the program, including possible faculty or the preferred qualifications or experience of those selected as faculty.

F. Designated Agency or Council

The office or judicial body which is authorized under State law or by delegation from the State Supreme Court to approve applications for SJI grant funds and to receive, administer, and be accountable for those funds.

G. Disclaimer

A brief statement that must be included at the beginning of a document or in the opening frames of a videotape produced with Institute support that specifies that the points of view expressed in the document or tape do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the Institute. See section VIII.A.11.a.(2) for the precise wording of this statement.

H. Grant Adjustment

A change in the design or scope of a project from that described in the approved application, acknowledged in writing by the Institute. See section X.A for a list of the types of changes requiring a formal grant adjustment. Ordinarily, changes requiring a Grant Adjustment (including budget reallocations between direct cost categories that individually or cumulatively exceed five percent of the approved original budget) should be requested at least 30 days in advance of the implementation of the requested change.

I. Grantee

The organization, entity, or individual to which an award of Institute funds is made. For a grant based on an application from a State or local court, grantee refers to the State Supreme Court or its designee.

J. Human Subjects

Individuals who are participants in an experimental procedure or who are asked to provide information about themselves, their attitudes, feelings, opinions, and/or experiences through an interview, questionnaire, or other data collection technique.
K. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance (JBE TA) Grant

A grant of up to $20,000 awarded to a State or local court to support expert assistance in designing or delivering judicial branch education programming, and/or the adaptation of an education program based on an SJIsupported curriculum that was previously developed and evaluated under an SJI Project Grant. See section VI.E. for a complete description of JBE TA Grant application requirements.

L. Match

The portion of project costs not borne by the Institute. Match includes both inkind and cash contributions. Cash match is the direct outlay of funds by the grantee to support the project. Examples of cash match are the dedication of funds to support a new employee or purchase new equipment to carry out the project; that portion of the grantee's Federally approved indirect cost rate that exceeds the Guideline's limit of permitted charges (75% of salaries and benefits); any other reduction in the indirect cost rate to be charged to the grant; and the application of project income (e.g., tuition or the proceeds of sales of grant products) generated during the grant period to grant costs.

Inkind match consists of contributions of time and/or services of current staff members, space, supplies, etc., made to the project by the grantee or others (e.g., advisory board members) working directly on the project.

Under normal circumstances, allowable match may be incurred only during the project period. When appropriate, and with the prior written permission of the Institute, match may be incurred from the date of the Board of Directors' approval of an award. Match does not include the time of participants attending an education program.

See section VIII.A.8. for the Institute's matching requirements. M. Products

Tangible materials resulting from funded projects including, but not limited to: Curricula; monographs; reports; books; articles; manuals; handbooks; benchbooks; guidelines; videotapes; audiotapes; computer software; and CDROM disks.

N. Project Grant

An initial grant lasting up to 15 months to support an innovative education, research, demonstration, or technical assistance project that can improve the administration of justice in State courts nationwide. Ordinarily, a project grant may not exceed $150,000 a year; however, a grant in excess of $100,000 is likely to be rare and awarded only to support highly promising projects that will have a significant national impact. See section VI.A. for a complete description of Project Grant application requirements.

O. ProjectRelated Income

Interest, royalties, registration and tuition fees, proceeds from the sale of products, and other earnings generated as a result of an Institute grant. Registration and tuition fees, and proceeds from the sale of products generated during the grant period may be counted as match. For a more complete description of different types of project related income, see section IX.G.
[[Page 67274]]

P. Scholarship

A grant of up to $1,500 awarded to a judge or court employee to cover tuition, transportation, and reasonable lodging expenses for an outofState educational program within the United States. See section VI.F. for a complete description of scholarship application requirements.

Q. Special Condition

A requirement attached to a grant award that is unique to a particular project.

R. State Supreme Court

The highest appellate court in a State, or, for the purposes of the Institute program, a constitutionally or legislatively established judicial council that acts in place of that court. In States having more than one court with final appellate authority, State Supreme Court means that court which also has administrative responsibility for the State's judicial system. State Supreme Court also includes the office of the court or council, if any, it designates to perform the functions described in this Guideline.

S. Subgrantee

A State or local court which receives Institute funds through the State Supreme Court.

T. Technical Assistance Grant

A grant, lasting up to 12 months, of up to $30,000 to a State or local court to support outside expert assistance in diagnosing a problem and developing and implementing a response to that problem. See section VI.D. for a complete description of technical assistance grant application requirements.

IV. Eligibility for Award

The Institute is authorized by Congress to award grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts to the following entities and types of organizations:

A. State and local courts and their agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(A)). Each application for funding from a State or local court must be approved, consistent with State law, by the State's Supreme Court or its designated agency or council. The latter shall receive all Institute funds awarded to such courts and be responsible for assuring proper administration of Institute funds, in accordance with section IX.C.2. of this Guideline.

B. National nonprofit organizations controlled by, operating in conjunction with, and serving the judicial branches of State governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(B)).

C. National nonprofit organizations for the education and training of judges and support personnel of the judicial branch of State governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(C)). An applicant is considered a national education and training applicant under section 10705(b)(1)(C) if:

1. The principal purpose or activity of the applicant is to provide education and training to State and local judges and court personnel; and

2. The applicant demonstrates a record of substantial experience in the field of judicial education and training.

D. Other eligible grant recipients (42 U.S.C.10705(b)(2)(A)(D)).

1. Provided that the objectives of the project can be served better, the Institute is also authorized to make awards to:

a. Nonprofit organizations with expertise in judicial administration;

b. Institutions of higher education;

c. Individuals, partnerships, firms, corporations (forprofit organizations must waive their fees); and

d. Private agencies with expertise in judicial administration.

2. The Institute may also make awards to State or local agencies and institutions other than courts for services that cannot be adequately provided through nongovernmental arrangements (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(3)).

E. Interagency Agreements. The Institute may enter into inter agency agreements with Federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)) and private funders to support projects consistent with the purposes of the State Justice Institute Act.
V. Types of Projects and Grants; Size of Awards

A. Types of Projects

The Institute supports the following general types of projects:

1. Education and training;

2. Research and evaluation;

3. Demonstration; and

4. Technical assistance.

B. Types of Grants

The Institute supports the following types of grants: 1. Project Grants

See sections II.A. and B., and VI.A. The Institute places no annual limitations on the overall number of project grant awards or the number of awards in each Special Interest category.

2. Continuation Grants

See sections III.D. and VI.C. In FY 2004, the Institute is allocating no more than 20% of available Project Grant funds for continuation grants.

3. Technical Assistance Grants

See sections II.C. and VI.D. In FY 2004, the Institute is reserving up to $300,000 for these grants.

4. Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants

See sections II.A.4.b., III.K., and VI.E. In FY 2004, the Institute is reserving up to $150,000 for Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants, which includes adaptations of curricula previously developed with SJI funding.

5. Scholarships

See sections II.A.4.c., III.P., and VI.F. In FY 2004, the Institute is reserving up to $200,000 for scholarships for judges and court employees. The Institute will reserve sufficient funds each quarter to assure the availability of scholarships throughout the year. C. Maximum Size of Awards

1. Except as specified below, applicants for new Project Grants and continuation grants may request funding in amounts up to $150,000 for 15 months, although new and continuation awards in excess of $100,000 are likely to be rare and to be made, if at all, only for highly promising proposals that will have a significant impact nationally.

2. Applicants for Technical Assistance Grants may request funding in amounts up to $30,000.

3. Applicants for Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants may request funding in amounts up to $20,000.

4. Applicants for scholarships may request funding in amounts up to $1,500.

D. Length of Grant Periods

1. Grant periods for all new and continuation projects ordinarily may not exceed 15 months. Absent extraordinary circumstances, no grant will continue for more than five years.

2. Grant periods for Technical Assistance Grants and Judicial Branch Education Technical Assistance Grants ordinarily may not exceed 12 months.
VI. Applications

A. Project Grants

An application for a Project Grant must include an application form; budget forms (with appropriate documentation); a project abstract and program narrative; a disclosure of lobbying form, when applicable; and certain certifications and assurances (see below). See Appendix F for the Project Grant application forms. For a summary of the [[Page 67275]]
http://www.statejustice.org) and click on OnLine Tutorials, then Project Grant.
1. Forms

a. Application Form (FORM A)

The application form requests basic information regarding the proposed project, the applicant, and the total amount of funding requested from the Institute. It also requires the signature of an individual authorized to certify on behalf of the applicant that the information contained in the application is true and complete; that submission of the application has been authorized by the applicant; and that if funding for the proposed project is approved, the applicant will comply with the requirements and conditions of the award, including the assurances set forth in Form D.

b. Certificate of State Approval (FORM B)

An application from a State or local court must include a copy of FORM B signed by the State's Chief Justice or Chief Judge, the director of the designated agency, or the head of the designated council. The signature denotes that the proposed project has been approved by the State's highest court or the agency or council it has designated. It denotes further that if the Institute approved funding for the project, the court or the specified designee will receive, administer, and be accountable for the awarded funds.

c. Budget Forms (FORM C or C1)

Applicants may submit the proposed project budget either in the tabular format of FORM C or in the spreadsheet format of FORM C1. Applicants requesting $100,000 or more are strongly encouraged to use the spreadsheet format. If the proposed project period is for more than a year, a separate form should be submitted for each year or portion of a year for which grant support is requested, as well as for the total length of the project.

In addition to FORM C or C1, applicants must provide a detailed budget narrative providing an explanation of the basis for the estimates in each budget category. (See section VI.A.4. below.)

If funds from other sources are required to conduct the project, either as match or to support other aspects of the project, the source, current status of the request, and anticipated decision date must be provided.

d. Assurances (FORM D)

This form lists the statutory, regulatory, and policy requirements with which recipients of Institute funds must comply.

e. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

Applicants other than units of State or local government are required to disclose whether they, or another entity that is part of the same organization as the applicant, have advocated a position before Congress on any issue, and to identify the specific subjects of their lobbying efforts. (See section VIII.A.7.)

2. Project Abstract

The abstract should highlight the purposes, goals, methods, and anticipated benefits of the proposed project. It should not exceed 1 singlespaced page on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative for an application may not exceed 25 double spaced pages on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper. Margins must be at least 1 inch, and type size must be at least 12point and 12 cpi. The pages should be numbered. This page limit does not include the forms, the abstract, the budget narrative, and any appendices containing resumes and letters of cooperation or endorsement. Additional background material should be attached only if it is essential to impart a clear understanding of the proposed project. Numerous and lengthy appendices are strongly discouraged.

The program narrative should address the following topics: a. Project Objectives

The applicant should include a clear, concise statement of what the proposed project is intended to accomplish. In stating the objectives of the project, applicants should focus on the overall programmatic objective (e.g., to enhance understanding and skills regarding a specific subject, or to determine how a certain procedure affects the court and litigants) rather than on operational objectives (e.g., provide training for 32 judges and court managers, or review data from 300 cases).

b. Program Areas To Be Covered

The applicant should note the Special Interest category or categories that are addressed by the proposed project (See section II.A.).

c. Need for the Project

If the project is to be conducted in any specific location(s), the applicant should discuss the particular needs of the project site(s) to be addressed by the project and why those needs are not being met through the use of existing programs, procedures, services, or other resources.

If the project is not sitespecific, the applicant should discuss the problems that the proposed project would address, and why existing programs, procedures, services, or other resources cannot adequately resolve those problems. The discussion should include specific references to the relevant literature and to the experience in the field.
d. Tasks, Methods and Evaluation
(1) Tasks and Methods. The applicant should delineate the tasks to be performed in achieving the project objectives and the methods to be used for accomplishing each task. For example:
(a) For research and evaluation projects, the applicant should include the data sources, data collection strategies, variables to be examined, and analytic procedures to be used for conducting the research or evaluation and ensuring the validity and general applicability of the results. For projects involving human subjects, the discussion of methods should address the procedures for obtaining respondents' informed consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and freedom from risk or harm, and protecting others who are not the subjects of research but would be affected by the research. If the potential exists for risk or harm to human subjects, a discussion should be included that explains the value of the proposed research and the methods to be used to minimize or eliminate such risk.
(b) For education and training projects, the applicant should include the adult education techniques to be used in designing and presenting the program, including the teaching/learning objectives of the educational design, the teaching methods to be used, and the opportunities for structured interaction among the participants; how faculty would be recruited, selected, and trained; the proposed number and length of the conferences, courses, seminars, or workshops to be conducted and the estimated number of persons who would attend them; the materials to be provided and how they would be developed; and the cost to participants.
(c) For demonstration projects, the applicant should include the demonstration sites and the reasons they were selected, or if the sites have not been chosen, how they would be identified and their cooperation obtained; and how the program or procedures would be implemented and monitored.
[[Page 67276]]
(d) For technical assistance projects, the applicant should explain the types of assistance that would be provided; the particular issues and problems for which assistance would be provided; how requests would be obtained and the type of assistance determined; how suitable providers would be selected and briefed; how reports would be reviewed; and the cost to recipients.
(2) Evaluation. Every project must include an evaluation plan to determine whether the project met its objectives. The evaluation should be designed to provide an objective and independent assessment of the effectiveness or usefulness of the training or services provided; the impact of the procedures, technology, or services tested; or the validity and applicability of the research conducted. In addition, where appropriate, the evaluation process should be designed to provide ongoing or periodic feedback on the effectiveness or utility of the project in order to promote its continuing improvement. The plan should present the qualifications of the evaluator(s); describe the criteria that would be used to evaluate the project's effectiveness in meeting its objectives; explain how the evaluation would be conducted, including the specific data collection and analysis techniques to be used; discuss why this approach would be appropriate; and present a schedule for completion of the evaluation within the proposed project period.

The evaluation plan should be appropriate to the type of project proposed. For example:
(a) Research. An evaluation approach suited to many research projects is a review by an advisory panel of the research methodology, data collection instruments, preliminary analyses, and products as they are drafted. The panel should be comprised of independent researchers and practitioners representing the perspectives affected by the proposed project.
(b) Education and Training. The most valuable approaches to evaluating educational or training programs reinforce the participants' learning experience while providing useful feedback on the impact of the program and possible areas for improvement. One appropriate evaluation approach is to assess the acquisition of new knowledge, skills, attitudes, or understanding through participant feedback on the seminar or training event. Such feedback might include a self assessment of what was learned along with the participant's response to the quality and effectiveness of faculty presentations, the format of sessions, the value or usefulness of the material presented, and other relevant factors. Another appropriate approach would be to use an independent observer who might request both verbal and written responses from participants in the program. When an education project involves the development of curricular materials, an advisory panel of relevant experts can be coupled with a test of the curriculum to obtain the reactions of participants and faculty as indicated above. (c) Demonstration. The evaluation plan for a demonstration project should encompass an assessment of program effectiveness (e.g., how well did it work?); user satisfaction, if appropriate; the cost
effectiveness of the program; a process analysis of the program (e.g., was the program implemented as designed, and/or did it provide the services intended to the targeted population?); the impact of the program (e.g., what effect did the program have on the court, and/or what benefits resulted from the program?); and the replicability of the program or components of the program.
(d) Technical Assistance. For technical assistance projects, applicants should explain how the quality, timeliness, and impact of the assistance provided would be determined, and develop a mechanism for feedback from both the users and providers of the technical assistance.

Evaluation plans involving human subjects should include a discussion of the procedures for obtaining respondents' informed consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and freedom from risk or harm, and protecting others who are not the subjects of the evaluation but would be affected by it. Other than the provision of
confidentiality to respondents, human subject protection issues ordinarily are not applicable to participants evaluating an education program.

e. Project Management

The applicant should present a detailed management plan, including the starting and completion date for each task; the time commitments to the project of key staff and their responsibilities regarding each project task; and the procedures that would ensure that all tasks are performed on time, within budget, and at the highest level of quality. In preparing the project time line, Gantt Chart, or schedule, applicants should make certain that all project activities, including publication or reproduction of project products and their initial dissemination, would occur within the proposed project period. The management plan must also provide for the submission of Quarterly Progress and Financial Reports within 30 days after the close of each calendar quarter (i.e., no later than January 30, April 30, July 30, and October 30).

Applicants should be aware that the Institute is unlikely to approve more than one limited extension of the grant period. Therefore, the management plan should be as realistic as possible and fully reflect the time commitments of the proposed project staff and consultants.

f. Products

The program narrative in the application should contain a description of the products to be developed (e.g., training curricula and materials, videotapes, articles, manuals, or handbooks), including when they would be submitted to the Institute. The budget should include the cost of producing and disseminating the product to each in State SJI library (See Appendix C), State chief justice, State court administrator, and other appropriate judges or court personnel. (1) Dissemination Plan. The application must explain how and to whom the products would be disseminated; describe how they would benefit the State courts, including how they could be used by judges and court personnel; identify development, production, and dissemination costs covered by the project budget; and present the basis on which products and services developed or provided under the grant would be offered to the courts community and the public at large (i.e., whether products would be distributed at no cost to recipients, or if costs are involved, the reason for charging recipients and the estimated price of the product) (See section VIII.A.11.b.). Ordinarily, applicants should schedule all product preparation and distribution activities within the project period.

A copy of each product must be sent to the library established in each State to collect the materials developed with Institute support. (A list of these libraries is contained in Appendix C.) Applicants proposing to develop webbased products should provide for sending a hardcopy document to the SJIdesignated libraries and other appropriate audiences to alert them to the availability of the Web site or electronic product (i.e., a written report with a reference to the Web site).

Fifteen (15) copies of all project products must be submitted to the Institute, along with an electronic version in .html or .pdf format.
(2) Types of Products and Press Releases. The type of product to be prepared depends on the nature of the
[[Page 67277]]
project. For example, in most instances, the products of a research, evaluation, or demonstration project should include an article summarizing the project findings that is publishable in a journal serving the courts community nationally, an executive summary that would be disseminated to the project's primary audience, or both. Applicants proposing to conduct empirical research or evaluation projects with national import should describe how they would make their data available for secondary analysis after the grant period. (See section VIII.A.14.a.).

The curricula and other products developed through education and training projects should be designed for use outside the classroom so that they may be used again by the original participants and others in the course of their duties.

In addition, recipients of project grants must prepare a press release describing the project and announcing the results, and distribute the release to a list of national and State judicial branch organizations. SJI will provide press release guidelines and a list of recipients to grantees at least 30 days before the end of the grant period.
(3) Institute Review. Applicants must submit a final draft of all written grant products to the Institute for review and approval at least 30 days before the products are submitted for publication or reproduction. For products in a videotape or CDROM format, applicants must provide for Institute review of the product at the treatment, script, roughcut, and final stages of development, or their equivalents. No grant funds may be obligated for publica

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT David I. Tevelin, Executive Director, or Kathy Schwartz, Deputy Director, State Justice Institute, 1650 King St. (Suite 600), Alexandria, VA 22314, (703) 6846100.