06-8837. Grant Guideline

AGENCY:

State Justice Institute.

ACTION:

Final Grant Guideline.

SUMMARY:

This Guideline sets forth the administrative, programmatic, and financial requirements attendant to Fiscal Year 2007 State Justice Institute grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts.

DATES:

October 27, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kevin Linskey, Executive Director, State Justice Institute, 1650 King St. (Suite 600), Alexandria, VA 22314, [phone] X201, [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

Pending appropriations legislation passed by the House (H.R. 5672) would appropriate $2,000,000 for SJI in fiscal year (FY) 2007; the Senate-passed version of the bill proposes to appropriate $4,500,000.

Regardless of the final amount provided to SJI for FY 2007, the Institute's Board of Directors intends to solicit grant applications across the range of grant programs available.

The following Grant Guideline is adopted by the State Justice Institute for FY 2007:

Table of Contents

I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute

II. Eligibility for Award

III. Scope of the Program

IV. Applications

V. Application Review Procedures

VI. Compliance Requirements

VII. Financial Requirements

VIII. Grant Adjustments

Appendix A SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts

Appendix B Grant Application Forms (Forms A, B, C, D, and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities)

Appendix C Line-Item Budget Form (Form E)

Appendix D Scholarship Application Forms (Forms S1 and S2)

I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute

The Institute was established by Public Law 98-620 to improve the administration of justice in the State courts of the United States. Incorporated in the State of Virginia as a private, nonprofit corporation, the Institute is charged, by statute, with the responsibility to:

• 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;
• Foster coordination and cooperation with the Federal judiciary;
• Promote recognition of the importance of the separation of powers doctrine to an independent judiciary; and
• 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 a 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 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; and,

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.

II. 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)).

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

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

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

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

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

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

a. Nonprofit organizations with expertise in judicial administration;

b. Institutions of higher education;

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

d. Private agencies with expertise in judicial administration.

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

E. Inter-agency Agreements. The Institute may enter into inter-agency agreements with Federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)) and private funders to support projects consistent with the purposes of the State Justice Institute Act.

III. Scope of the Program

SJI is offering five types of grants in FY 2007: Project Grants, Technical Assistance (TA) Grants, Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants, Scholarships, and Partner Grants. Effective immediately, SJI will no longer award Continuation Grants to extend previous or future Project or Partner Grants.

A. Project Grants

Project Grants are intended to support innovative education and training, research and evaluation, demonstration, and technical assistance projects that can improve the administration of justice in State courts locally or nationwide. Project Grants may ordinarily not exceed $300,000. Grant periods for Project Grants ordinarily may not exceed 36 months. No Continuation Grants will be awarded.

Applicants for Project Grants will be required to contribute a cash match of not less than 50% of the total cost of the proposed project. In other words, grant awards by SJI must be matched at least dollar for dollar by grant applicants. Applicants may contribute the required cash match directly or in cooperation with third parties.

Prospective applicants should carefully review Section VI.8. (matching requirements) and Section VI.16.a. (non-supplantation) of the guidelines prior to beginning the application process. If questions arise, applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with the Institute.

As set forth in Section I., the Institute is authorized to fund projects addressing a broad range of program areas. Though the Board is likely to favor Project Grant applications focused on the Special Interest program categories described below, potential applicants are also encouraged to bring to the attention of the Institute innovative projects outside those categories. Funds will not be made available for the ordinary, routine operation of court systems or programs in any of these areas.

1. 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:

• Formulate new procedures and techniques, or creatively enhance existing procedures and techniques;
• Address aspects of the State judicial systems that are in special need of serious attention;
• Have national significance by developing products, services, and techniques that may be used in other States; and
• 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 Board-designated Special Interest program categories listed below.

The order of listing does not imply any ordering of priorities among the categories.

a. Court Budgeting. Unlike the legislative and executive branches, the judiciary seems to weather regular periods of budgetary feast and famine. This has proven very disruptive to court staffing, services, technology investment, and professional education and development. The Institute is interested in pursuing “how to” projects that focus on “best practices” regarding budget structure and formulation, sources of revenue, inter-branch relations, and other methods that contribute to stabilizing court budgets and improving their long-term financial prospects.

b. Courts and the Media. Recent repeated public attacks on courts have gone largely unanswered, because judges were unwilling and/or courts were unable to respond effectively. No one is better prepared than a judge to describe decision-making on the bench within the law and the Constitution. The Institute is interested in projects that explore the role of judge as public commentator within ethical and professional bounds. The Institute is also interested in judicial education or other programs that prepare judges and court officials to serve as spokesmen in short notice, high profile circumstances, especially in situations where courts lack dedicated press secretaries. Finally, the Institute is interested in promoting initiatives that improve relations between the judiciary and the media, since much of the recent rancor between the two seems based on unfamiliarity with one another's duties, responsibilities, and limitations. In particular, the Institute is interested in proposals that focus on cultivating trust and open communication between the Third Branch and the Fourth Estate on a day-to-day basis, because dialogue between strangers is rarely started and never sustained in a crisis.

c. Elder Issues. This category includes research, demonstration, evaluation, and education projects designed to improve management of guardianship, probate, fraud, Americans with Disability Act, and other types of elder-related cases. The Institute is particularly interested in projects that would develop and evaluate judicial branch education programs addressing elder law and related issues.

d. Performance Standards and Outcome Measures. This category includes projects that will develop and measure performance standards and outcomes for all aspects of court operations. The Institute is particularly interested in projects that take the National Center for State Courts’ “CourTools” to the next level. Other initiatives designed to further professionalize court staff and operations, or to objectively evaluate the costs and benefits and cost-effectiveness of problem solving courts, are also welcome.

e. Defending the Institution. The perils facing courts today include attacks on our system of justice and judges and catastrophes natural and manmade. The Institute is seeking proposals to address each.

Attacks on courts and judges have increased. These attacks are often not scrutinized because many citizens in this country lack education or knowledge about the role of the courts in our system of government. The Institute remains interested in supporting the creation of public education projects that would develop and test materials that judges and court leaders can use to inform community groups and constituencies about the nature and importance of federalism, separation and balance of powers, and judicial independence. In addition, as mentioned above, projects that would improve the relationship between courts and the media are encouraged.

Catastrophes, natural and manmade, can destroy the ability of our courts to help provide law and order. The Board is interested in: (1) Continuity of operations proposals that go beyond planning and table top exercises to include “no notice” drills and “red team” exercises involving all personnel integral to court operations, including those from outside agencies such as sheriffs' offices, (2) innovative and secure court security information-sharing projects that piggyback on, or otherwise exploit, existing capabilities and technologies (because new resources for new systems are apt to be limited), and (3) piloting a low cost “virtual” 24/7 threat center (replacing costly “bricks and mortar” proposals) netting Federal, State, and local court security first responders with analysts conducting real-time threat assessments.

Though “Managing Self-Represented Litigation”, “Application of Technology in the Courts”, and “Children and Families in Court” are no longer listed as Special Interest program categories, the SJI Board retains a keen interest in these areas and would welcome ground breaking proposals in all three.

Project Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.A.

B. Technical Assistance (TA) Grants

TA Grants are intended to provide State or local courts, particularly small, rural, or impoverished urban courts or regional court associations, with sufficient support to obtain expert assistance to diagnose a problem, develop a response to that problem, and implement any needed changes. TA Grants may not exceed $30,000, and shall only cover the cost of obtaining the services of expert consultants. Examples of expenses not covered by TA Grants include the salaries, benefits, travel, or training costs of full-or part-time court employees. Grant periods for TA Grants ordinarily may not exceed 24 months. In calculating project duration, applicants are cautioned to fully consider the time required to issue a request for proposals, negotiate a contract with the selected provider, and execute the project. The SJI Board intends to reserve up to $250,000 for TA Grants. Sufficient funds will be reserved each quarter to assure the availability of TA Grants throughout the year.

Applicants for TA Grants will be required to contribute a match of not less than 50% of the grant amount requested, of which 20% must be cash. In other words, a grantee seeking a $30,000 TA grant must provide a $15,000 match, of which up to $12,000 can be in-kind and not less than $3,000 must be cash. Applicants considering cash matches well in excess of $3,000 should consider applying for Project Grants and are strongly urged to consult with the Institute prior to applying.

TA Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.B.

C. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants

CAT Grants are intended to: (1) Enable courts and regional or national court associations to modify and adapt model curricula, course modules, or conference programs to meet States' or local jurisdictions' educational needs; train instructors to present portions or all of the curricula; and pilot-test them to determine their appropriateness, quality, and effectiveness, or (2) conduct judicial branch education and training programs, led by either expert or in-house personnel, designed to prepare judges and court personnel for innovations, reforms, and/or new technologies recently adopted by grantee courts. CAT Grants may not exceed $20,000. Grant periods for CAT Grants ordinarily may not exceed 12 months. The SJI Board intends to reserve up to $100,000 for CAT Grants.

Applicants for CAT Grants will be required to contribute a match of not less than 50% of the grant amount requested, of which 20% must be cash. In other words, a grantee seeking a $20,000 CAT grant must provide a $10,000 match, of which up to $8,000 can be in-kind and not less than $2,000 must be cash. Applicants considering cash matches well in excess of $2,000 should consider applying for Project Grants and are strongly urged to consult with the Institute prior to applying.

CAT Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.C.

D. Scholarships for Judges and Court Managers

Scholarships are intended to enhance the skills, knowledge, and abilities of State court judges and court managers by enabling them to attend out-of-State, or to enroll in online, educational and training programs sponsored by national and State providers that they could not otherwise attend or take online because of limited State, local, and personal budgets. Scholarships may not exceed $1,500. The SJI Board intends to reserve up to $250,000 for scholarships. Sufficient funds will be reserved each quarter to assure the availability of scholarships throughout the year.

Scholarship application procedures can be found in section IV.D.

E. Partner Grants

Partner Grants are intended to allow SJI and Federal, State, or local agencies or foundations, trusts, or other private entities to combine financial resources in pursuit of common interests. Though many, if not most, Partner Grants will fall under the Special Interest program categories cited in section III.A., proposals addressing other emerging or high priority court-related problems will be considered on a case-by-case basis. SJI and its financial partners may set any level for Partner Grants, subject to the entire amount of the grant being available at the time of the award; applicants for Partner Grants may request any amount of funding. Grant periods for Partner Grants ordinarily may not exceed 36 months. Absent extraordinary circumstances, no grant will continue for more than five years.

Partner Grants are subject to the same cash match requirement as Project Grants. In other words, grant awards by SJI must be matched at least dollar for dollar. Applicants may contribute the required cash match directly or in cooperation with third parties. A Federal third party may contribute up to 49% of the total cost of a project, but only to purchase a service. A Federal third party's contribution cannot be used as a grantee's match.

Partner Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.E.

IV. 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 B for the Project Grant application forms. For a summary of the application process, visit the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Project Grant.

1. Forms

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

b. Certificate of State Approval (Form B). An application from a State or local court must include a copy of Form B signed by the State's Chief Justice or Chief Judge, the director of the designated agency, or the head of the designated council. The signature denotes that the proposed project has been approved by the State's highest court or the agency or council it has designated. It denotes further that if 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 Form (Form C). Applicants must submit a Form C. In addition to Form C, applicants must provide a detailed budget narrative providing an explanation of the basis for the estimates in each budget category (see subsection 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 VI.A.7.).

2. Project Abstract

The abstract should highlight the purposes, goals, methods, and anticipated benefits of the proposed project. It should not exceed 1 single-spaced page on 81/2 by 11 inch paper.

3. Program Narrative

The program narrative for an application may not exceed 25 double-spaced pages on 81/2 by 11 inch paper. Margins must be at least 1 inch, and type size must be at least 12-point and 12 cpi. The pages should be numbered. This page limit does not include the forms, the abstract, the budget narrative, and any appendices containing resumes and letters of cooperation or endorsement. Additional background material should be attached only if it is essential to impart a clear understanding of the proposed project. Numerous and lengthy appendices are strongly discouraged.

The program narrative should address the following topics:

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

b. Program Areas To Be Covered. The applicant should note the Special Interest category or categories that are addressed by the proposed project (see section III.A.).

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

If the project is not site-specific, the applicant should discuss the problems that the proposed project would address, and why existing programs, procedures, services, or other resources cannot adequately resolve those problems. The discussion should include specific references to the relevant literature and to the experience in the field.

d. Tasks, Methods and Evaluations.

(1) Tasks and Methods. The applicant should delineate the tasks to be performed in achieving the project objectives and the methods to be used for accomplishing each task. For example:

(a) For research and evaluation projects, the applicant should include the data sources, data collection strategies, variables to be examined, and analytic procedures to be used for conducting the research or evaluation and ensuring the validity and general applicability of the results. For projects involving human subjects, the discussion of methods should address the procedures for obtaining respondents' informed consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and freedom from risk or harm, and protecting others who are not the subjects of research but would be affected by the research. If the potential exists for risk or harm to human subjects, a discussion should be included that explains the value of the proposed research and the methods to be used to minimize or eliminate such risk.

(b) For education and training projects, the applicant should include the adult education techniques to be used in designing and presenting the program, including the teaching/learning objectives of the educational design, the teaching methods to be used, and the opportunities for structured interaction among the participants; how faculty would be recruited, selected, and trained; the proposed number and length of the conferences, courses, seminars, or workshops to be conducted and the estimated number of persons who would attend them; the materials to be provided and how they would be developed; and the cost to participants.

(c) For demonstration projects, the applicant should include the demonstration sites and the reasons they were selected, or if the sites have not been chosen, how they would be identified and their cooperation obtained; and how the program or procedures would be implemented and monitored.

(d) For technical assistance projects, the applicant should explain the types of assistance that would be provided; the particular issues and problems for which assistance would be provided; how requests would be obtained and the type of assistance determined; how suitable providers would be selected and briefed; how reports would be reviewed; and the cost to recipients.

(2) Evaluation. Every project must include an evaluation plan to determine whether the project met its objectives. The evaluation should be designed to provide an objective and independent assessment of the effectiveness or usefulness of the training or services provided; the impact of the procedures, technology, or services tested; or the validity and applicability of the research conducted. In addition, where appropriate, the evaluation process should be designed to provide ongoing or periodic feedback on the effectiveness or utility of the project in order to promote its continuing improvement. The plan should present the qualifications of the evaluator(s); describe the criteria that would be used to evaluate the project's effectiveness in meeting its objectives; explain how the evaluation would be conducted, including the specific data collection and analysis techniques to be used; discuss why this approach would be appropriate; and present a schedule for completion of the evaluation within the proposed project period.

The evaluation plan should be appropriate to the type of project proposed. For example:

(a) 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) 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) 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) 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), per section VI.A.13.

Applicants should be aware that the Institute is unlikely to approve a limited extension of the grant period without very good cause. 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, audiotapes, videotapes, DVDs, computer software, CD-ROM disks, articles, guidelines, manuals, reports, handbooks, benchbooks, or books), 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 A), 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 VI.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 (see Appendix A). Applicants proposing to develop Web-based products should provide for sending a hard-copy document to the SJI-designated libraries and other appropriate audiences to alert them to the availability of the Web site or electronic product (i.e., a written report with a reference to the Web site).

Fifteen (15) copies of all project products must be submitted to the Institute, along with an electronic version in .html or .pdf format.

(2) Types of Products and Press Releases. The type of product to be prepared depends on the nature of the project. For example, in most instances, the products of a research, evaluation, or demonstration project should include an article summarizing the project findings that is publishable in a journal serving the courts community nationally, an executive summary that would be disseminated to the project's primary audience, or both. Applicants proposing to conduct empirical research or evaluation projects with national import should describe how they would make their data available for secondary analysis after the grant period (see section VI.A.14.a.).

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

In addition, recipients of project grants must prepare a press release describing the project and announcing the results, and distribute the release to a list of national and State judicial branch organizations. SJI will provide press release guidelines and a list of recipients to grantees at least 30 days before the end of the grant period.

(3) Institute Review. Applicants must submit a final draft of all written grant products to the Institute for review and approval at least 30 days before the products are submitted for publication or reproduction. For products in a videotape or CD-ROM format, applicants must provide for Institute review of the product at the treatment, script, rough-cut, and final stages of development, or their equivalents. No grant funds may be obligated for publication or reproduction of a final grant product without the written approval of the Institute (see section VI.A.11.f.).

(4) Acknowledgment, Disclaimer, and Logo. Applicants must also include in all project products a prominent acknowledgment that support was received from the Institute and a disclaimer paragraph based on the example provided in section VI.A.11.a.2. of the Guideline. The “SJI” logo must appear on the front cover of a written product, or in the opening frames of a video, unless the Institute approves another placement.

g. Applicant Status. An applicant that is not a State or local court and has not received a grant from the Institute within the past three years should state whether it is either a national non-profit organization controlled by, operating in conjunction with, and serving the judicial branches of State governments, or a national non-profit organization for the education and training of State court judges and support personnel (see section II.). If the applicant is a nonjudicial unit of Federal, State, or local government, it must explain whether the proposed services could be adequately provided by non-governmental entities.

h. Staff Capability. The applicant should include a summary of the training and experience of the key staff members and consultants that qualify them for conducting and managing the proposed project. Resumes of identified staff should be attached to the application. If one or more key staff members and consultants are not known at the time of the application, a description of the criteria that would be used to select persons for these positions should be included. The applicant also should identify the person who would be responsible for managing and reporting on the financial aspects of the proposed project.

i. Organizational Capacity. Applicants that have not received a grant from the Institute within the past three years should include a statement describing their capacity to administer grant funds, including the financial systems used to monitor project expenditures (and income, if any), and a summary of their past experience in administering grants, as well as any resources or capabilities that they have that would particularly assist in the successful completion of the project.

Unless requested otherwise, an applicant that has received a grant from the Institute within the past three years should describe only the changes in its organizational capacity, tax status, or financial capability that may affect its capacity to administer a grant.

If the applicant is a non-profit organization (other than a university), it must also provide documentation of its 501(c) tax-exempt status as determined by the Internal Revenue Service and a copy of a current certified audit report. For purposes of this requirement, “current” means no earlier than two years prior to the present calendar year.

If a current audit report is not available, the Institute will require the organization to complete a financial capability questionnaire, which must be signed by a Certified Public Accountant. Other applicants may be required to provide a current audit report, a financial capability questionnaire, or both, if specifically requested to do so by the Institute.

j. Statement of Lobbying Activities. Non-governmental applicants must submit the Institute's Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form, which documents whether they, or another entity that is a part of the same organization as the applicant, have advocated a position before Congress on any issue, and identifies the specific subjects of their lobbying efforts (see Appendix B).

k. Letters of Cooperation or Support. If the cooperation of courts, organizations, agencies, or individuals other than the applicant is required to conduct the project, the applicant should attach written assurances of cooperation and availability to the application, or send them under separate cover. To ensure sufficient time to bring them to the Board's attention, letters of support sent under separate cover must be received by the deadlines set below in subsection A.5.

4. Budget Narrative

The budget narrative should provide the basis for the computation of all project-related costs. When the proposed project would be partially supported by grants from other funding sources, applicants should make clear what costs would be covered by those other grants. Additional background information or schedules may be attached if they are essential to obtaining a clear understanding of the proposed budget. Numerous and lengthy appendices are strongly discouraged.

The budget narrative should cover the costs of all components of the project and clearly identify costs attributable to the project evaluation. Under OMB grant guidelines incorporated by reference in this Guideline, grant funds may not be used to purchase alcoholic beverages.

a. Justification of Personnel Compensation. The applicant should set forth the percentages of time to be devoted by the individuals who would staff the proposed project, the annual salary of each of those persons, and the number of work days per year used for calculating the percentages of time or daily rates of those individuals. The applicant should explain any deviations from current rates or established written organizational policies. If grant funds are requested to pay the salary and related costs for a current employee of a court or other unit of government, the applicant should explain why this would not constitute a supplantation of State or local funds in violation of 42 U.S.C. 10706(d)(1). An acceptable explanation may be that the position to be filled is a new one established in conjunction with the project or that the grant funds would support only the portion of the employee's time that would be dedicated to new or additional duties related to the project.

b. Fringe Benefit Computation. The applicant should provide a description of the fringe benefits provided to employees. If percentages are used, the authority for such use should be presented, as well as a description of the elements included in the determination of the percentage rate.

c. Consultant/Contractual Services and Honoraria. The applicant should describe the tasks each consultant would perform, the estimated total amount to be paid to each consultant, the basis for compensation rates (e.g., the number of days multiplied by the daily consultant rates), and the method for selection. Rates for consultant services must be set in accordance with section VII.I.2.c. Prior written Institute approval is required for any consultant rate in excess of $800 per day; Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more than $1,100 per day. Honorarium payments must be justified in the same manner as consultant payments.

d. Travel. Transportation costs and per diem rates must comply with the policies of the applicant organization. If the applicant does not have an established travel policy, then travel rates must be consistent with those established by the Institute or the Federal Government (a copy of the Institute's travel policy is available upon request). The budget narrative should include an explanation of the rate used, including the components of the per diem rate and the basis for the estimated transportation expenses. The purpose of the travel should also be included in the narrative.

e. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase only the equipment necessary to demonstrate a new technological application in a court or that is otherwise essential to accomplishing the objectives of the project. Equipment purchases to support basic court operations ordinarily will not be approved. The applicant should describe the equipment to be purchased or leased and explain why the acquisition of that equipment is essential to accomplish the project's goals and objectives. The narrative should clearly identify which equipment is to be leased and which is to be purchased. The method of procurement should also be described. Purchases of automated data processing equipment must comply with section VII.I.2.b.

f. Supplies. The applicant should provide a general description of the supplies necessary to accomplish the goals and objectives of the grant. In addition, the applicant should provide the basis for the amount requested for this expenditure category.

g. Construction. Construction expenses are prohibited except for the limited purposes set forth in section VI.A.16.b. Any allowable construction or renovation expense should be described in detail in the budget narrative.

h. Telephone. Applicants should include anticipated telephone charges, distinguishing between monthly charges and long distance charges in the budget narrative. Also, applicants should provide the basis used to calculate the monthly and long distance estimates.

i. Postage. Anticipated postage costs for project-related mailings, including distribution of the final product(s), should be described in the budget narrative. The cost of special mailings, such as for a survey or for announcing a workshop, should be distinguished from routine operational mailing costs. The bases for all postage estimates should be included in the budget narrative.

j. Printing/Photocopying. Anticipated costs for printing or photocopying project documents, reports, and publications should be included in the budget narrative, along with the bases used to calculate these estimates.

k. Indirect Costs. Recoverable indirect costs are limited to no more than 75% of a grantee's direct personnel costs, i.e. salaries plus fringe benefits (see section VII.I.4.).

Applicants should describe the indirect cost rates applicable to the grant in detail. If costs often included within an indirect cost rate are charged directly (e.g., a percentage of the time of senior managers to supervise project activities), the applicant should specify that these costs are not included within its approved indirect cost rate. These rates must be established in accordance with section VII.I.4. If the applicant has an indirect cost rate or allocation plan approved by any Federal granting agency, a copy of the approved rate agreement must be attached to the application.

l. Match. Applicants that do not contemplate making matching contributions continuously throughout the course of the project or on a task-by-task basis must provide a schedule within 30 days after the beginning of the project period indicating at what points during the project period the matching contributions would be made (see sections VI.A.8., and VII.E.1.).

5. Submission Requirements

a. Every applicant must submit an original and three copies of the application package consisting of Form A; Form B, if the application is from a State or local court, or a Disclosure of Lobbying Form, if the applicant is not a unit of State or local government; Form C; the Application Abstract; the Program Narrative; the Budget Narrative; and any necessary appendices.

Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next Board meeting. Please mark Project Application on the application package envelope and send it to: State Justice Institute, 1650 King Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.

Receipt of each application will be acknowledged by letter or e-mail.

b. Applicants submitting more than one application may include material that would be identical in each application in a cover letter. This material will be incorporated by reference into each application and counted against the 25-page limit for the program narrative. A copy of the cover letter should be attached to each copy of the application.

B. Technical Assistance (TA) Grants

1. Application Procedures

For a summary of the application procedures for TA Grants, visit the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click On-Line Tutorials, then Technical Assistance Grant.

In lieu of formal applications, applicants for TA Grants may submit, at any time, an original and three copies of a detailed letter describing the proposed project as well as a Form A, “State Justice Institute Application” (see Appendix B). Letters from individual trial or appellate courts must be signed by the presiding judge or manager of that court. Letters from State court systems must be signed by the Chief Justice or State Court Administrator. Letters from regional court associations must be signed by the president of the association.

2. Application Format

Although there is no prescribed form for the letter, or a minimum or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the following information:

a. Need for Funding. What is the critical need facing the applicant? How would the proposed technical assistance help the applicant meet this critical need? Why cannot State or local resources fully support the costs of the required consultant services?

b. Project Description. What tasks would the consultant be expected to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which organization or individual would be hired to provide the assistance, and how was this consultant selected? If a consultant has not yet been identified, what procedures and criteria would be used to select the consultant (applicants are expected to follow their jurisdictions' normal procedures for procuring consultant services)? What specific tasks would the consultant(s) and court staff undertake? What is the schedule for completion of each required task and the entire project? How would the applicant oversee the project and provide guidance to the consultant, and who at the court or regional court association would be responsible for coordinating all project tasks and submitting quarterly progress and financial status reports?

If the consultant has been identified, the applicant should provide a letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in and availability for the project, as well as the consultant's ability to complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the proposed cost. The consultant must agree to submit a detailed written report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical assistance.

c. Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be taken to facilitate implementation of the consultant's recommendations upon completion of the technical assistance? For example, if the support or cooperation of specific court officials or committees, other agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or a court other than the applicant would be needed to adopt the changes recommended by the consultant and approved by the court, how would they be involved in the review of the recommendations and development of the implementation plan?

d. Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its Designated Agency or Council. If a State or local court submits a request for technical assistance, it must include written concurrence on the need for the technical assistance. This concurrence may be a copy of SJI FORM B (see Appendix B) signed by the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from the State Chief Justice or designee. The concurrence may be submitted with the applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to consideration of the application. The concurrence also must specify whether the State Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account for the grant funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or a specified agency or council to receive the funds directly.

3. Budget and Matching State Contribution

A completed Form E, “Line-Item Budget Form” (see Appendix C), and budget narrative must be included with the letter requesting technical assistance. The estimated cost of the technical assistance services should be broken down into the categories listed on the budget form rather than aggregated under the Consultant/Contractual category.

The budget narrative should provide the basis for all project-related costs, including the basis for determining the estimated consultant costs, if compensation of the consultant is required (e.g., the number of days per task times the requested daily consultant rate). Applicants should be aware that consultant rates above $800 per day must be approved in advance by the Institute, and that no consultant will be paid more than $1,100 per day from Institute funds. In addition, the budget should provide for submission of two copies of the consultant's final report to the Institute.

Recipients of TA Grants do not have to submit an audit report but must maintain appropriate documentation to support expenditures (see section VI.A.3.).

4. Submission Requirements

Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next Board meeting.

If the support or cooperation of agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or courts other than the applicant would be needed in order for the consultant to perform the required tasks, written assurances of such support or cooperation should accompany the application letter. Support letters also may be submitted under separate cover; however, to ensure that there is sufficient time to bring them to the attention of the Board's Technical Assistance Grant Committee, letters sent under separate cover must be received by the same date as the technical assistance request being supported.

C. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants

1. Application Procedures

For a summary of the application procedures for CAT Grants, visit the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grant.

In lieu of formal applications, applicants should submit an original and three photocopies of a detailed letter as well as a Form A, “State Justice Institute Application” (see Appendix B).

2. Application Format

Although there is no prescribed format for the letter, or a minimum or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the following information:

a. For adaptation of a curriculum:

(1) Project Description. What is the title of the model curriculum to be adapted and who originally developed it? Why is this education program needed at the present time? What are the project's goals? What are the learning objectives of the adapted curriculum? What program components would be implemented, and what types of modifications, if any, are anticipated in length, format, learning objectives, teaching methods, or content? Who would be responsible for adapting the model curriculum? Who would the participants be, how many would there be, how would they be recruited, and from where would they come (e.g., from a single local jurisdiction, from across the State, from a multi-State region, from across the nation)?

(2) Need for Funding. Why are sufficient State or local resources unavailable to fully support the modification and presentation of the model curriculum? What is the potential for replicating or integrating the adapted curriculum in the future using State or local funds, once it has been successfully adapted and tested?

(3) Likelihood of Implementation. What is the proposed timeline, including the project start and end dates? On what date(s) would the judicial branch education program be presented? What process would be used to modify and present the program? Who would serve as faculty, and how were they selected? What measures would be taken to facilitate subsequent presentations of the program? [Note: Ordinarily, an independent evaluation of a curriculum adaptation project is not required; however, the results of any evaluation should be included in the final report.]

(4) Expressions of Interest by Judges and/or Court Personnel. Does the proposed program have the support of the court system or association leadership, and of judges, court managers, and judicial branch education personnel who are expected to attend? [Note: Applicants may demonstrate this by attaching letters of support.]

(5) Chief Justice's Concurrence. Local courts should attach a concurrence form signed by the Chief Justice of the State or his or her designee (see Appendix B, Form B).

b. For training assistance:

(1) Need for Funding. What is the court reform or initiative prompting the need for training? How would the proposed training help the applicant implement planned changes at the court? Why cannot State or local resources fully support the costs of the required training?

(2) Project Description. What tasks would the trainer(s) be expected to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which organization or individual would be hired, if in-house personnel are not the trainers, to provide the training, and how was the trainer selected? If a trainer has not yet been identified, what procedures and criteria would be used to select the trainer? [Note: Applicants are expected to follow their jurisdictions' normal procedures for procuring consultant services.] What specific tasks would the trainer and court staff or regional court association members undertake? What presentation methods will be used? What is the schedule for completion of each required task and the entire project? How would the applicant oversee the project and provide guidance to the trainer, and who at the court or affiliated with the regional court association would be responsible for coordinating all project tasks and submitting quarterly progress and financial status reports?

If the trainer has been identified, the applicant should provide a letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in and availability for the project, as well as the trainer's ability to complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the proposed cost. The trainer must agree to submit a detailed written report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical assistance.

(3) Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be taken to coordinate the implementation of the new reform, initiative, etc. and the training to support the same? For example, if the support or cooperation of specific court or regional court association officials or committees, other agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or a court other than the applicant would be needed to adopt the reform and initiate the training proposed, how would they be involved in the review of the recommendations and development of the implementation plan?

(4) Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its Designated Agency or Council. If a State or local court submits an application, it must include written concurrence on the need for the technical assistance. This concurrence may be a copy of SJI Form B (see Appendix B) signed by the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from the State Chief Justice or designee. The concurrence may be submitted with the applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to consideration of the application. The concurrence also must specify whether the State Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account for the grant funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or a specified agency or council to receive the funds directly.

4. Budget and Matching State Contribution

Applicants should attach a copy of budget Form E (see Appendix C) and a budget narrative (see subsection A.4. above) that describes the basis for the computation of all project-related costs and the source of the match offered.

5. Submission Requirements

Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next Board meeting.

For curriculum adaptation requests, applicants should allow at least 60 days between the Board meeting and the date of the proposed program to allow sufficient time for needed planning. For example, a court that plans to conduct an education program in June 2007 should submit its application no later than 30 days before the Board's winter (March) meeting.

D. Scholarships

1. Limitations

An applicant may apply for a scholarship for only one educational program during any given application cycle. Applicants may not receive more than one scholarship in a three-year period unless the course specifically assumes multi-year participation or the course is part of a graduate degree program in judicial studies in which the applicant is currently enrolled (neither exception should be taken as a commitment on the part of the SJI Board to approve serial scholarships).

Scholarship funds may be used only to cover the costs of tuition, transportation, and reasonable lodging expenses (not to exceed $150 per night, including taxes). Transportation expenses may include round-trip coach airfare or train fare. Scholarship recipients are strongly encouraged to take advantage of excursion or other special airfares (e.g., reductions offered when a ticket is purchased 21 days in advance of the travel date) when making their travel arrangements. Recipients who drive to a program site may receive $.445/mile up to the amount of the advanced-purchase round-trip airfare between their homes and the program sites. Funds to pay tuition, transportation, and lodging expenses in excess of $1,500 and other costs of attending the program—such as conference fees, meals, materials, transportation to and from airports, and local transportation (including rental cars)—at the program site must be obtained from other sources or borne by the scholarship recipient. Scholarship applicants are encouraged to check other sources of financial assistance and to combine aid from various sources whenever possible.

A scholarship is not transferable to another individual. It may be used only for the course specified in the application unless the applicant's request to attend a different course that meets the eligibility requirements is approved in writing by the Institute. Decisions on such requests will be made within 30 days after the receipt of the request letter.

2. Eligibility Requirements

For a summary of the scholarship award process, visit the Institute's Web site at http://www.statejustice.org and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Scholarship.

a. Recipients. Scholarships can be awarded only to full-time judges of State or local trial and appellate courts; full-time professional, State, or local court personnel with management responsibilities; and supervisory and management probation personnel in judicial branch probation offices. Senior judges, part-time judges, quasi-judicial hearing officers including referees and commissioners, administrative law judges, staff attorneys, law clerks, line staff, law enforcement officers, and other executive branch personnel are not eligible to receive a scholarship.

b. Courses. A scholarship can be awarded only for: (1) A course presented in a State other than the one in which the applicant resides or works, or (2) an online course. The course must be designed to enhance the skills of new or experienced judges and court managers; or be offered by a recognized graduate program for judges or court managers. The annual or mid-year meeting of a State or national organization of which the applicant is a member does not qualify as an out-of-State educational program for scholarship purposes, even though it may include workshops or other training sessions.

Applicants are encouraged not to wait for the decision on a scholarship to register for an educational program they wish to attend.

3. Forms

a. Scholarship Application—Form S1 (Appendix D). The Scholarship Application requests basic information about the applicant and the educational program the applicant would like to attend. It also addresses the applicant's commitment to share the skills and knowledge gained with local court colleagues and to submit an evaluation of the program the applicant attends. The Scholarship Application must bear the original signature of the applicant. Faxed or photocopied signatures will not be accepted.

b. Scholarship Application Concurrence—Form S2 (Appendix D). Judges and court managers applying for scholarships must submit the written concurrence of the Chief Justice of the State's Supreme Court (or the Chief Justice's designee) on the Institute's Judicial Education Scholarship Concurrence form (see Appendix D). The signature of the presiding judge of the applicant's court cannot be substituted for that of the Chief Justice or the Chief Justice's designee. Court managers, other than elected clerks of court, also must submit a letter of support from their immediate supervisors.

4. Submission Requirements

Scholarship applications must be submitted during the periods specified below:

January 1 and February 23, 2007, for programs beginning between April 1 and June 30, 2007;

April 2 and May 25, 2007 for programs beginning between July 1 and September 30, 2007;

July 2 and August 24, 2007 for programs beginning between October 1 and December 31, 2007; and

October 1 and November 30, 2007 for programs beginning between January 1 and March 31, 2008.

No exceptions or extensions will be granted. Applications sent prior to the beginning of an application period will be treated as having been sent one week after the beginning of that application period. All the required items must be received for an application to be considered. If the Concurrence form or letter of support is sent separately from the application, the postmark date of the last item to be sent will be used in applying the above criteria.

All applications should be sent by mail or courier (not fax or e-mail) to: Scholarship Program Coordinator, State Justice Institute, 1650 King Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.

E. Partner Grants

SJI and its funding partners may meld, pick and choose, or waive their application procedures, grant cycles, or grant requirements to expedite the award of jointly-funded grants targeted at emerging or high priority problems confronting State and local courts. As often as not, SJI may solicit brief proposals from potential grantees to shop among fellow financial partners as a first step. Should SJI be chosen as the lead grant manager, Project Grant application procedures will apply to the proposed Partner Grant. As with Project Grants, Partner Grants will be targeted at initiatives likely to have a significant national impact.

V. Application Review Procedures

A. Preliminary Inquiries

The Institute staff will answer inquiries concerning application procedures. The staff contact will be named in the Institute's letter or e-mail acknowledging receipt of the application.

B. Selection Criteria

1. Project Grant Applications

a. Project Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the criteria set forth below. The Institute will accord the greatest weight to the following criteria:

(1) The soundness of the methodology;

(2) The demonstration of need for the project;

(3) The appropriateness of the proposed evaluation design;

(4) If applicable, the key findings and recommendations of the most recent evaluation and the proposed responses to those findings and recommendations;

(5) The applicant's management plan and organizational capabilities;

(6) The qualifications of the project's staff;

(7) The products and benefits resulting from the project, including the extent to which the project will have long-term benefits for State courts across the nation;

(8) The degree to which the findings, procedures, training, technology, or other results of the project can be transferred to other jurisdictions;

(9) The reasonableness of the proposed budget; and

(10) The demonstration of cooperation and support of other agencies that may be affected by the project.

(11) The proposed project's relationship to one of the Special Interest categories set forth in section III.A.

b. In determining which projects to support, the Institute will also consider whether the applicant is a State court, a national court support or education organization, a non-court unit of government, or other type of entity eligible to receive grants under the Institute's enabling legislation (see section II.); the availability of financial assistance from other sources for the project; the amount of the applicant's match; the extent to which the proposed project would also benefit the Federal courts or help State courts enforce Federal constitutional and legislative requirements; and the level of appropriations available to the Institute in the current year and the amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal years.

2. Technical Assistance (TA) Grant Applications

TA Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the following criteria:

a. Whether the assistance would address a critical need of the applicant;

b. The soundness of the technical assistance approach to the problem;

c. The qualifications of the consultant(s) to be hired or the specific criteria that will be used to select the consultant(s);

d. The commitment of the court or association to act on the consultant's recommendations; and

e. The reasonableness of the proposed budget.

The Institute also will consider factors such as the level and nature of the match that would be provided, diversity of subject matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations available to the Institute in the current year, and the amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal years.

3. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grant Applications

CAT Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the following criteria:

a. For curriculum adaptation projects:

(1) The goals and objectives of the proposed project;

(2) The need for outside funding to support the program;

(3) The appropriateness of the approach in achieving the project's educational objectives;

(4) The likelihood of effective implementation and integration of the modified curriculum into ongoing educational programming; and

(5) Expressions of interest by the judges and/or court personnel who would be directly involved in or affected by the project.

b. For training assistance:

(1) Whether the training would address a critical need of the court or association;

(2) The soundness of the training approach to the problem;

(3) The qualifications of the trainer(s) to be hired or the specific criteria that will be used to select the trainer(s);

(4) The commitment of the court or association to the training program; and

(5) The reasonableness of the proposed budget.

The Institute will also consider factors such as the reasonableness of the amount requested, compliance with match requirements, diversity of subject matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations available in the current year, and the amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal years.

4. Scholarships

Scholarships will be approved only for programs that either (1) enhance the skills of judges and court managers; or (2) are part of a graduate degree program for judges or court personnel. Scholarships will be awarded on the basis of:

a. The date on which the application and concurrence (and support letter, if required) were sent (“first come, first served”);

b. The unavailability of State or local funds or scholarship funds from another source to cover the costs of attending the program, or participating online;

c. The absence of educational programs in the applicant's State addressing the topic(s) covered by the educational program for which the scholarship is being sought;

d. Geographic balance among the recipients;

e. The balance of scholarships among educational providers and programs;

f. The balance of scholarships among the types of courts and court personnel (trial judge, appellate judge, trial court administrator) represented; and

g. The level of appropriations available to the Institute in the current year and the amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal years.

The postmark or courier receipt will be used to determine the date on which the application form and other required items were sent.

5. Partner Grants

It seems probable that the selection criteria for Partner Grants will be driven by the collective priorities of the “bankers' roundtable” that forms around this grant-making opportunity and the collective assessments of roundtable participants regarding the needs and capabilities of court and court-related organizations. Having settled on priorities, SJI and its financial partners will likely contact the courts or court-related organizations most acceptable as pilots, laboratories, consultants, or the like. Should SJI be chosen as the lead grant manager, Project Grant application review procedures will apply to the proposed Partner Grant.

C. Review and Approval Process

1. Project Grant Applications

The Institute's Board of Directors will review the applications competitively. The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary and a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant selection criterion. The staff will present the narrative summaries and rating sheets to the Board for its review. The Board will review all application summaries and decide which projects it will fund. The decision to fund a project is solely that of the Board of Directors.

The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of the Institute.

2. Technical Assistance (TA) and Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grant Applications

The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary of each application and a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant selection criterion. The Board of Directors has delegated its authority to approve TA and CAT Grants to the committee established for each program. The committee will review the applications competitively.

The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of the Institute.

3. Scholarships

A committee of the Institute's Board of Directors will review scholarship applications quarterly. The Board of Directors has delegated its authority to approve scholarships to the committee established for the program. The committee will review the applications competitively. In the event of a tie vote, the Chairman will serve as the tie-breaker.

The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of the Institute.

4. Partner Grants

SJI's internal process for the review and approval of Partner Grants will depend upon negotiations with fellow financiers. SJI may use its procedures, a partner's procedures, a mix of both, or entirely unique procedures. All Partner Grants will have to be approved by the Board of Directors on whatever schedule makes sense at the time.

D. Return Policy

Unless a specific request is made, unsuccessful applications will not be returned. Applicants are advised that Institute records are subject to the provisions of the Federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

E. Notification of Board Decision

1. The Institute will send written notice to applicants concerning all Board decisions to approve, defer, or deny their respective applications. For all applications (except scholarships), the Institute also will convey the key issues and questions that arose during the review process. A decision by the Board to deny an application may not be appealed, but it does not prohibit resubmission of a proposal based on that application in a subsequent funding cycle. The Institute will also notify the State court administrator when grants are approved by the Board to support projects that will be conducted by or involve courts in that State.

2. The Institute intends to notify each scholarship applicant of the Board committee's decision within 30 days after the close of the relevant application period.

F. Response to Notification of Approval

With the exception of those approved for scholarships, applicants have 30 days from the date of the letter notifying them that the Board has approved their application to respond to any revisions requested by the Board. If the requested revisions (or a reasonable schedule for submitting such revisions) have not been submitted to the Institute within 30 days after notification, the approval may be rescinded and the application presented to the Board for reconsideration. In the event an issue will only be resolved after award, such as the selection of a consultant, the final award document will include a Special Condition that will require additional grantee reporting and Institute review and approval. Special Conditions, in the form of incentives or sanctions, may also be used in situations where past poor performance by a grantee necessitates increased grant oversight.

VI. Compliance Requirements

The State Justice Institute Act contains limitations and conditions on grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements awarded by the Institute. The Board of Directors has approved additional policies governing the use of Institute grant funds. These statutory and policy requirements are set forth below.

A. Recipients of Project Grants

1. Advocacy

No funds made available by the Institute may be used to support or conduct training programs for the purpose of advocating particular nonjudicial public policies or encouraging nonjudicial political activities (42 U.S.C. 10706(b)).

2. Approval of Key Staff

If the qualifications of an employee or consultant assigned to a key project staff position are not described in the application or if there is a change of a person assigned to such a position, the recipient must submit a description of the qualifications of the newly assigned person to the Institute. Prior written approval of the qualifications of the new person assigned to a key staff position must be received from the Institute before the salary or consulting fee of that person and associated costs may be paid or reimbursed from grant funds (see section VIII.A.7.).

3. Audit

Recipients of project grants must provide for an annual fiscal audit which includes an opinion on whether the financial statements of the grantee present fairly its financial position and its financial operations are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (see section VII.K. for the requirements of such audits). Scholarship recipients, Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grants, and Technical Assistance Grants are not required to submit an audit, but they must maintain appropriate documentation to support all expenditures (see section VIII.K.).

4. Budget Revisions

Budget revisions among direct cost categories that: (a) Transfer grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category, or (b) individually or cumulatively exceed five percent of the approved original budget or the most recently approved revised budget require prior Institute approval (see section VIII.A.1.).

5. Conflict of Interest

Personnel and other officials connected with Institute-funded programs must adhere to the following requirements:

a. No official or employee of a recipient court or organization shall participate personally through decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise in any proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other determination, contract, grant, cooperative agreement, claim, controversy, or other particular matter in which Institute funds are used, where, to his or her knowledge, he or she or his or her immediate family, partners, organization other than a public agency in which he or she is serving as officer, director, trustee, partner, or employee or any person or organization with whom he or she is negotiating or has any arrangement concerning prospective employment, has a financial interest.

b. In the use of Institute project funds, an official or employee of a recipient court or organization shall avoid any action which might result in or create the appearance of:

(1) Using an official position for private gain; or

(2) affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of the Institute program.

c. Requests for proposals or invitations for bids issued by a recipient of Institute funds or a subgrantee or subcontractor will provide notice to prospective bidders that the contractors who develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, and/or requests for proposals for a proposed procurement will be excluded from bidding on or submitting a proposal to compete for the award of such procurement.

6. Inventions and Patents

If any patentable items, patent rights, processes, or inventions are produced in the course of Institute-sponsored work, such fact shall be promptly and fully reported to the Institute. Unless there is a prior agreement between the grantee and the Institute on disposition of such items, the Institute shall determine whether protection of the invention or discovery shall be sought. The Institute will also determine how the rights in the invention or discovery, including rights under any patent issued thereon, shall be allocated and administered in order to protect the public interest consistent with “Government Patent Policy” (President's Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, February 18, 1983, and statement of Government Patent Policy).

7. Lobbying

a. Funds awarded to recipients by the Institute shall not be used, indirectly or directly, to influence Executive Orders or similar promulgations by Federal, State or local agencies, or to influence the passage or defeat of any legislation by Federal, State or local legislative bodies (42 U.S.C. 10706(a)).

b. It is the policy of the Board of Directors to award funds only to support applications submitted by organizations that would carry out the objectives of their applications in an unbiased manner. Consistent with this policy and the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 10706, the Institute will not knowingly award a grant to an applicant that has, directly or through an entity that is part of the same organization as the applicant, advocated a position before Congress on the specific subject matter of the application.

8. Matching Requirements

All grantees other than scholarship recipients are required to provide a match. A match is the portion of project costs not borne by the Institute. Match includes both cash and in-kind contributions. Cash match is the direct outlay of funds by the grantee or a third party 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 or the application of project income (e.g., tuition or the proceeds of sales of grant products) generated during the grant period to grant costs.

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

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. The amount and nature of required match depends on the type of grant (see section III.).

The grantee is responsible for ensuring that the total amount of match proposed is actually contributed. If a proposed contribution is not fully met, the Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly, in order to maintain the ratio originally provided for in the award agreement (see section VII.E.1.).

The Board of Directors looks favorably upon any unrequired match contributed by applicants when making grant decisions.

The match requirement may be waived in exceptionally rare circumstances upon the request of the Chief Justice of the highest court in the State or the highest ranking official in the requesting organization and approval by the Board of Directors (42 U.S.C. 10705(d)). The Board of Directors encourages all applicants to provide the maximum amount of cash and in-kind match possible, even if a waiver is approved. The amount and nature of match are criteria in the grant selection process (see section V.B.1.b.).

9. Nondiscrimination

No person may, on the basis of race, sex, national origin, disability, color, or creed be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity supported by Institute funds. Recipients of Institute funds must immediately take any measures necessary to effectuate this provision.

10. Political Activities

No recipient may contribute or make available Institute funds, program personnel, or equipment to any political party or association, or the campaign of any candidate for public or party office. Recipients are also prohibited from using funds in advocating or opposing any ballot measure, initiative, or referendum. Officers and employees of recipients shall not intentionally identify the Institute or recipients with any partisan or nonpartisan political activity associated with a political party or association, or the campaign of any candidate for public or party office (42 U.S.C. 10706(a)).

11. Products

a. Acknowledgment, Logo, and Disclaimer. (1) Recipients of Institute funds must acknowledge prominently on all products developed with grant funds that support was received from the Institute. The “SJI” logo must appear on the front cover of a written product, or in the opening frames of a video product, unless another placement is approved in writing by the Institute. This includes final products printed or otherwise reproduced during the grant period, as well as reprintings or reproductions of those materials following the end of the grant period. A camera-ready logo sheet is available from the Institute upon request.

(2) Recipients also must display the following disclaimer on all grant products: “This [document, film, videotape, etc.] was developed under [grant/cooperative agreement] number SJI-[insert number] from the State Justice Institute. The points of view expressed are those of the [author(s), filmmaker(s), etc.] and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the State Justice Institute.”

b. Charges for Grant-Related Products/Recovery of Costs. (1) When Institute funds fully cover the cost of developing, producing, and disseminating a product (e.g., a report, curriculum, videotape, or software), the product should be distributed to the field without charge. When Institute funds only partially cover the development, production, or dissemination costs, the grantee may, with the Institute's prior written approval, recover its costs for developing, producing, and disseminating the material to those requesting it, to the extent that those costs were not covered by Institute funds or grantee matching contributions.

(2) Applicants should disclose their intent to sell grant-related products in the application. Grantees must obtain the written prior approval of the Institute of their plans to recover project costs through the sale of grant products. Written requests to recover costs ordinarily should be received during the grant period and should specify the nature and extent of the costs to be recouped, the reason that such costs were not budgeted (if the rationale was not disclosed in the approved application), the number of copies to be sold, the intended audience for the products to be sold, and the proposed sale price. If the product is to be sold for more than $25, the written request also should include a detailed itemization of costs that will be recovered and a certification that the costs were not supported by either Institute grant funds or grantee matching contributions.

(3) In the event that the sale of grant products results in revenues that exceed the costs to develop, produce, and disseminate the product, the revenue must continue to be used for the authorized purposes of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent with the State Justice Institute Act that have been approved by the Institute (see section VII.G.).

c. Copyrights. Except as otherwise provided in the terms and conditions of an Institute award, a recipient is free to copyright any books, publications, or other copyrightable materials developed in the course of an Institute-supported project, but the Institute shall reserve a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, the materials for purposes consistent with the State Justice Institute Act.

d. Due Date. All products and, for TA and CAT grants, consultant and/or trainer reports (see section VI.B.1 & 2) are to be completed and distributed (see below) not later than the end of the award period, not the 90-day close out period. The latter is only intended for grantee final reporting and to liquidate obligations (see section VII.L.).

e. Distribution. In addition to the distribution specified in the grant application, grantees shall send:

(1) Fifteen (15) copies of each final product developed with grant funds to the Institute, unless the product was developed under either a Technical Assistance or a Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grant, in which case submission of 2 copies is required;

(2) An electronic version of the product in .html or .pdf format to the Institute; and

(3) One copy of each final product developed with grant funds to the library established in each State to collect materials prepared with Institute support. A list of the libraries is contained in Appendix A. Labels for these libraries are available on the Institute's Web site, http://www.statejustice.org.

(4) Bound copies of products, where possible and cost-effective, rather than hard copies in ring binders, to SJI depository libraries. Grantees that develop Web-based electronic products must send a hard-copy document to the SJI-designated libraries and other appropriate audiences to alert them to the availability of the Web site or electronic product. Recipients of Technical Assistance and Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grants are not required to submit final products to State libraries.

(5) A press release describing the project and announcing the results to a list of national and State judicial branch organizations provided by the Institute.

f. Institute Approval. No grant funds may be obligated for publication or reproduction of a final product developed with grant funds without the written approval of the institute. Grantees shall submit a final draft of each written product to the Institute for review and approval. The draft must be submitted at least 30 days before the product is scheduled to be sent for publication or reproduction to permit Institute review and incorporation of any appropriate changes required by the Institute. Grantees must provide for timely reviews by the Institute of videotape, DVD or CD-ROM products at the treatment, script, rough cut, and final stages of development or their equivalents.

g. Original Material. All products prepared as the result of Institute-supported projects must be originally-developed material unless otherwise specified in the award documents. Material not originally developed that is included in such products must be properly identified, whether the material is in a verbatim or extensive paraphrase format.

12. Prohibition Against Litigation Support

No funds made available by the Institute may be used directly or indirectly to support legal assistance to parties in litigation, including cases involving capital punishment.

13. Reporting Requirements

a. Recipients of Institute funds other than scholarships must submit Quarterly Progress and Financial Status Reports within 30 days of the close of each calendar quarter (that is, no later than January 30, April 30, July 30, and October 30). The Quarterly Progress Reports shall include a narrative description of project activities during the calendar quarter, the relationship between those activities and the task schedule and objectives set forth in the approved application or an approved adjustment thereto, any significant problem areas that have developed and how they will be resolved, and the activities scheduled during the next reporting period. Failure to comply with the requirements of this provision could result in the termination of a grantee's award.

b. The quarterly Financial Status Report must be submitted in accordance with section VII.H.2. of this Guideline. A final project Progress Report and Financial Status Report shall be submitted within 90 days after the end of the grant period in accordance with section VII.L.1. of this Guideline.

14. Research

a. Availability of Research Data for Secondary Analysis. Upon request, grantees must make available for secondary analysis a diskette(s) or data tape(s) containing research and evaluation data collected under an Institute grant and the accompanying code manual. Grantees may recover the actual cost of duplicating and mailing or otherwise transmitting the data set and manual from the person or organization requesting the data. Grantees may provide the requested data set in the format in which it was created and analyzed.

b. Confidentiality of Information. Except as provided by Federal law other than the State Justice Institute Act, no recipient of financial assistance from SJI may use or reveal any research or statistical information furnished under the Act by any person and identifiable to any specific private person for any purpose other than the purpose for which the information was obtained. Such information and copies thereof shall be immune from legal process, and shall not, without the consent of the person furnishing such information, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any action, suit, or other judicial, legislative, or administrative proceedings.

c. Human Subject Protection. Human subjects are defined as 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. All research involving human subjects shall be conducted with the informed consent of those subjects and in a manner that will ensure their privacy and freedom from risk or harm and the protection of persons who are not subjects of the research but would be affected by it, unless such procedures and safeguards would make the research impractical. In such instances, the Institute must approve procedures designed by the grantee to provide human subjects with relevant information about the research after their involvement and to minimize or eliminate risk or harm to those subjects due to their participation.

15. State and Local Court Applications

Each application for funding from a State or local court must be approved, consistent with State law, by the State's Supreme Court, or its designated agency or council. The Supreme Court or its designee shall receive, administer, and be accountable for all funds awarded on the basis of such an application (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)). See section VII.C.2.

16. Supplantation and Construction

To ensure that funds are used to supplement and improve the operation of State courts, rather than to support basic court services, funds shall not be used for the following purposes:

a. To supplant State or local funds supporting a program or activity (such as paying the salary of court employees who would be performing their normal duties as part of the project, or paying rent for space which is part of the court's normal operations);

b. To construct court facilities or structures, except to remodel existing facilities or to demonstrate new architectural or technological techniques, or to provide temporary facilities for new personnel or for personnel involved in a demonstration or experimental program; or

c. Solely to purchase equipment.

17. Suspension or Termination of Funding

After providing a recipient reasonable notice and opportunity to submit written documentation demonstrating why fund termination or suspension should not occur, the Institute may terminate or suspend funding of a project that fails to comply substantially with the Act, the Guideline, or the terms and conditions of the award (42 U.S.C. 10708(a)).

18. Title to Property

At the conclusion of the project, title to all expendable and nonexpendable personal property purchased with Institute funds shall vest in the recipient court, organization, or individual that purchased the property if certification is made to and approved by the Institute that the property will continue to be used for the authorized purposes of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent with the State Justice Institute Act. If such certification is not made or the Institute disapproves such certification, title to all such property with an aggregate or individual value of $1,000 or more shall vest in the Institute, which will direct the disposition of the property.

B. Recipients of Technical Assistance (TA) and Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants

Recipients of TA and CAT Grants must comply with the requirements listed in section VI.A. (except the requirements pertaining to audits in subsection A.3. above and product dissemination and approval in subsection A.11.e. and f. above) and the reporting requirements below:

1. Technical Assistance (TA) Grant Reporting Requirements

Recipients of TA Grants must submit to the Institute one copy of a final report that explains how it intends to act on the consultant's recommendations, as well as two copies of the consultant's written report.

2. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grant Reporting Requirements

Recipients of CAT Grants must submit one copy of the agenda or schedule, outline of presentations and/or relevant instructor's notes, copies of overhead transparencies, power point presentations, or other visual aids, exercises, case studies and other background materials, hypotheticals, quizzes, and other materials involving the participants, manuals, handbooks, conference packets, evaluation forms, and suggestions for replicating the program, including possible faculty or the preferred qualifications or experience of those selected as faculty, developed under the grant at the conclusion of the grant period, along with a final report that includes any evaluation results and explains how the grantee intends to present the educational program in the future, as well as two copies of the consultant's or trainer's report.

C. Scholarship Recipients

1. Scholarship recipients are responsible for disseminating the information received from the course to their court colleagues locally and, if possible, throughout the State (e.g., by developing a formal seminar, circulating the written material, or discussing the information at a meeting or conference).

Recipients also must submit to the Institute a certificate of attendance at the program, an evaluation of the educational program they attended, and a copy of the notice of any scholarship funds received from other sources. A copy of the evaluation must be sent to the Chief Justice of the scholarship recipient's State. A State or local jurisdiction may impose additional requirements on scholarship recipients.

2. To receive the funds authorized by a scholarship award, recipients must submit a Scholarship Payment Voucher (Form S3) together with a tuition statement from the program sponsor, a transportation fare receipt (or statement of the driving mileage to and from the recipient's home to the site of the educational program), and a lodging receipt.

Scholarship Payment Vouchers must be submitted within 90 days after the end of the course which the recipient attended.

3. Scholarship recipients are encouraged to check with their tax advisors to determine whether the scholarship constitutes taxable income under Federal and State law.

D. Partner Grants

The compliance requirements for Partner Grant recipients will depend upon the agreements struck between the grant financiers and between lead financiers and grantees. Should SJI be the lead, the compliance requirements for Project Grants will apply.

VII. Financial Requirements

A. Purpose

The purpose of this section is to establish accounting system requirements and offer guidance on procedures to assist all grantees, subgrantees, contractors, and other organizations in:

1. Complying with the statutory requirements for the award, disbursement, and accounting of funds;

2. Complying with regulatory requirements of the Institute for the financial management and disposition of funds;

3. Generating financial data to be used in planning, managing, and controlling projects; and

4. Facilitating an effective audit of funded programs and projects.

B. References

Except where inconsistent with specific provisions of this Guideline, the following circulars are applicable to Institute grants and cooperative agreements under the same terms and conditions that apply to Federal grantees. The circulars supplement the requirements of this section for accounting systems and financial record-keeping and provide additional guidance on how these requirements may be satisfied (circulars may be obtained on the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/​omb).

1. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.

2. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments.

3. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-88, Indirect Cost Rates, Audit and Audit Follow-up at Educational Institutions.

4. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments.

5. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110, Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit Organizations.

6. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-122, Cost Principles for Non-profit Organizations.

7. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments.

8. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Non-profit Institutions.

C. Supervision and Monitoring Responsibilities

1. Grantee Responsibilities

All grantees receiving awards from the Institute are responsible for the management and fiscal control of all funds. Responsibilities include accounting for receipts and expenditures, maintaining adequate financial records, and refunding expenditures disallowed by audits.

2. Responsibilities of State Supreme Court

a. Each application for funding from a State or local court must be approved, consistent with State law, by the State's Supreme Court, or its designated agency or council.

b. The State Supreme Court or its designee shall receive all Institute funds awarded to such courts; be responsible for assuring proper administration of Institute funds; and be responsible for all aspects of the project, including proper accounting and financial record-keeping by the subgrantee. These responsibilities include:

(1) Reviewing Financial Operations. The State Supreme Court or its designee should be familiar with, and periodically monitor, its subgrantees' financial operations, records system, and procedures. Particular attention should be directed to the maintenance of current financial data.

(2) Recording Financial Activities. The subgrantee's grant award or contract obligation, as well as cash advances and other financial activities, should be recorded in the financial records of the State Supreme Court or its designee in summary form. Subgrantee expenditures should be recorded on the books of the State Supreme Court or evidenced by report forms duly filed by the subgrantee. Matching contributions provided by subgrantees should likewise be recorded, as should any project income resulting from program operations.

(3) Budgeting and Budget Review. The State Supreme Court or its designee should ensure that each subgrantee prepares an adequate budget as the basis for its award commitment. The State Supreme Court should maintain the details of each project budget on file.

(4) Accounting for Match. The State Supreme Court or its designee will ensure that subgrantees comply with the match requirements specified in this Guideline (see section VI.A.8.).

(5) Audit Requirement. The State Supreme Court or its designee is required to ensure that subgrantees meet the necessary audit requirements set forth by the Institute (see sections K. below and VI.A.3.).

(6) Reporting Irregularities. The State Supreme Court, its designees, and its subgrantees are responsible for promptly reporting to the Institute the nature and circumstances surrounding any financial irregularities discovered.

D. Accounting System

The grantee is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of accounting and internal controls and for ensuring that an adequate system exists for each of its subgrantees and contractors. An acceptable and adequate accounting system:

1. Properly accounts for receipt of funds under each grant awarded and the expenditure of funds for each grant by category of expenditure (including matching contributions and project income);

2. Assures that expended funds are applied to the appropriate budget category included within the approved grant;

3. Presents and classifies historical costs of the grant as required for budgetary and evaluation purposes;

4. Provides cost and property controls to assure optimal use of grant funds;

5. Is integrated with a system of internal controls adequate to safeguard the funds and assets covered, check the accuracy and reliability of the accounting data, promote operational efficiency, and assure conformance with any general or special conditions of the grant;

6. Meets the prescribed requirements for periodic financial reporting of operations; and

7. Provides financial data for planning, control, measurement, and evaluation of direct and indirect costs.

E. Total Cost Budgeting and Accounting

Accounting for all funds awarded by the Institute must be structured and executed on a “Total Project Cost” basis. That is, total project costs, including Institute funds, State and local matching shares, and any other fund sources included in the approved project budget serve as the foundation for fiscal administration and accounting. Grant applications and financial reports require budget and cost estimates on the basis of total costs.

1. Timing of Matching Contributions

Matching contributions need not be applied at the exact time of the obligation of Institute funds. Ordinarily, the full matching share must be obligated during the award period; however, with the written permission of the Institute, contributions made following approval of the grant by the Institute's Board of Directors but before the beginning of the grant may be counted as match. Grantees that do not contemplate making matching contributions continuously throughout the course of a project, or on a task-by-task basis, are required to submit a schedule within 30 days after the beginning of the project period indicating at what points during the project period the matching contributions will be made. If a proposed cash or in-kind match is not fully met, the Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly to maintain the ratio of grant funds to matching funds stated in the award agreement.

2. Records for Match

All grantees must maintain records that clearly show the source, amount, and timing of all matching contributions. In addition, if a project has included, within its approved budget, contributions which exceed the required matching portion, the grantee must maintain records of those contributions in the same manner as it does Institute funds and required matching shares. For all grants made to State and local courts, the State Supreme Court has primary responsibility for grantee/subgrantee compliance with the requirements of this section (see subsection C.2. above).

F. Maintenance and Retention of Records

All financial records, including supporting documents, statistical records, and all other information pertinent to grants, subgrants, cooperative agreements, or contracts under grants, must be retained by each organization participating in a project for at least three years for purposes of examination and audit. State Supreme Courts may impose record retention and maintenance requirements in addition to those prescribed in this section.

1. Coverage

The retention requirement extends to books of original entry, source documents supporting accounting transactions, the general ledger, subsidiary ledgers, personnel and payroll records, canceled checks, and related documents and records. Source documents include copies of all grant and subgrant awards, applications, and required grantee/subgrantee financial and narrative reports. Personnel and payroll records shall include the time and attendance reports for all individuals reimbursed under a grant, subgrant or contract, whether they are employed full-time or part-time. Time and effort reports are required for consultants.

2. Retention Period

The three-year retention period starts from the date of the submission of the final expenditure report.

3. Maintenance

Grantees and subgrantees are expected to see that records of different fiscal years are separately identified and maintained so that requested information can be readily located. Grantees and subgrantees are also obligated to protect records adequately against fire or other damage. When records are stored away from the grantee's/subgrantee's principal office, a written index of the location of stored records should be on hand, and ready access should be assured.

4. Access

Grantees and subgrantees must give any authorized representative of the Institute access to and the right to examine all records, books, papers, and documents related to an Institute grant.

G. Project-Related Income

Records of the receipt and disposition of project-related income must be maintained by the grantee in the same manner as required for the project funds that gave rise to the income and must be reported to the Institute (see subsection H.2. below). The policies governing the disposition of the various types of project-related income are listed below.

1. Interest

A State and any agency or instrumentality of a State, including institutions of higher education and hospitals, shall not be held accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds. When funds are awarded to subgrantees through a State, the subgrantees are not held accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds. Local units of government and nonprofit organizations that are grantees must refund any interest earned. Grantees shall ensure minimum balances in their respective grant cash accounts.

2. Royalties

The grantee/subgrantee may retain all royalties received from copyrights or other works developed under projects or from patents and inventions, unless the terms and conditions of the grant provide otherwise.

3. Registration and Tuition Fees

Registration and tuition fees may be considered as cash match with the prior written approval of the Institute. Estimates of registration and tuition fees, and any expenses to be offset by the fees, should be included in the application budget forms and narrative.

4. Income from the Sale of Grant Products

If the sale of products occurs during the project period, the income may be treated as cash match with the prior written approval of the Institute. The costs and income generated by the sales must be reported on the Quarterly Financial Status Reports and documented in an auditable manner. Whenever possible, the intent to sell a product should be disclosed in the application or reported to the Institute in writing once a decision to sell products has been made. The grantee must request approval to recover its product development, reproduction, and dissemination costs as specified in section VI.A.11.b.

5. Other

Other project income shall be treated in accordance with disposition instructions set forth in the grant's terms and conditions.

H. Payments and Financial Reporting Requirements

1. Payment of Grant Funds

The procedures and regulations set forth below are applicable to all Institute grant funds and grantees.

a. Request for Advance or Reimbursement of Funds. Grantees will receive funds on a “check-issued” basis. Upon receipt, review, and approval of a Request for Advance or Reimbursement by the Institute, a check will be issued directly to the grantee or its designated fiscal agent. A request must be limited to the grantee's immediate cash needs. The Request for Advance or Reimbursement, along with the instructions for its preparation, will be included in the official Institute award package.

b. Termination of Advance and Reimbursement Funding. When a grantee organization receiving cash advances from the Institute:

(1) Demonstrates an unwillingness or inability to attain program or project goals, or to establish procedures that will minimize the time elapsing between cash advances and disbursements, or cannot adhere to guideline requirements or special conditions;

(2) Engages in the improper award and administration of subgrants or contracts; or

(3) Is unable to submit reliable and/or timely reports; the Institute may terminate advance financing and require the grantee organization to finance its operations with its own working capital. Payments to the grantee shall then be made by check to reimburse the grantee for actual cash disbursements. In the event the grantee continues to be deficient, the Institute may suspend reimbursement payments until the deficiencies are corrected. In extreme cases, grants may be terminated.

c. Principle of Minimum Cash on Hand. Grantees should request funds based upon immediate disbursement requirements. Grantees should time their requests to ensure that cash on hand is the minimum needed for disbursements to be made immediately or within a few days.

2. Financial Reporting

a. General Requirements. To obtain financial information concerning the use of funds, the Institute requires that grantees/subgrantees submit timely reports for review.

b. Due Dates and Contents. A Financial Status Report is required from all grantees, other than scholarship recipients, for each active quarter on a calendar-quarter basis. This report is due within 30 days after the close of the calendar quarter. It is designed to provide financial information relating to Institute funds, State and local matching shares, project income, and any other sources of funds for the project, as well as information on obligations and outlays. A copy of the Financial Status Report, along with instructions for its preparation, is included in each official Institute Award package. If a grantee requests substantial payments for a project prior to the completion of a given quarter, the Institute may request a brief summary of the amount requested, by object class, to support the Request for Advance or Reimbursement.

3. Consequences of Non-Compliance With Submission Requirement

Failure of the grantee to submit required financial and progress reports may result in suspension or termination of grant payments.

I. Allowability of Costs

1. General

Except as may be otherwise provided in the conditions of a particular grant, cost allowability is determined in accordance with the principles set forth in OMB Circulars A-21, Cost Principles Applicable to Grants and Contracts with Educational Institutions; A-87, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments; and A-122, Cost Principles for Non-profit Organizations. No costs may be recovered to liquidate obligations incurred after the approved grant period. Circulars may be obtained on the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/​omb.

2. Costs Requiring Prior Approval

a. Pre-agreement Costs. The written prior approval of the Institute is required for costs considered necessary but which occur prior to the start date of the project period.

b. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase or lease only that equipment essential to accomplishing the goals and objectives of the project. The written prior approval of the Institute is required when the amount of automated data processing (ADP) equipment to be purchased or leased exceeds $10,000 or software to be purchased exceeds $3,000.

c. Consultants. The written prior approval of the Institute is required when the rate of compensation to be paid a consultant exceeds $800 a day. Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more than $1,100 per day.

d. Budget Revisions. Budget revisions among direct cost categories that (i) transfer grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (ii) individually or cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) of the approved original budget or the most recently approved revised budget require prior Institute approval (see section VIII.A.1.).

3. Travel Costs

Transportation and per diem rates must comply with the policies of the grantee. If the grantee does not have an established written travel policy, then travel rates must be consistent with those established by the Institute or the Federal Government. Institute funds may not be used to cover the transportation or per diem costs of a member of a national organization to attend an annual or other regular meeting of that organization.

4. Indirect Costs

These are costs of an organization that are not readily assignable to a particular project but are necessary to the operation of the organization and the performance of the project. The cost of operating and maintaining facilities, depreciation, and administrative salaries are examples of the types of costs that are usually treated as indirect costs. Although the Institute's policy requires all costs to be budgeted directly, it will accept indirect costs if a grantee has an indirect cost rate approved by a Federal agency as set forth below. However, recoverable indirect costs are limited to no more than 75% of a grantee's direct personnel costs (salaries plus fringe benefits).

a. Approved Plan Available.

(1) A copy of an indirect cost rate agreement or allocation plan approved for a grantee during the preceding two years by any Federal granting agency on the basis of allocation methods substantially in accord with those set forth in the applicable cost circulars must be submitted to the Institute.

(2) Where flat rates are accepted in lieu of actual indirect costs, grantees may not also charge expenses normally included in overhead pools, e.g., accounting services, legal services, building occupancy and maintenance, etc., as direct costs.

b. Establishment of Indirect Cost Rates. To be reimbursed for indirect costs, a grantee must first establish an appropriate indirect cost rate. To do this, the grantee must prepare an indirect cost rate proposal and submit it to the Institute within three months after the start of the grant period to assure recovery of the full amount of allowable indirect costs. The rate must be developed in accordance with principles and procedures appropriate to the type of grantee institution involved as specified in the applicable OMB Circular.

c. No Approved Plan. If an indirect cost proposal for recovery of indirect costs is not submitted to the Institute within three months after the start of the grant period, indirect costs will be irrevocably disallowed for all months prior to the month that the indirect cost proposal is received.

J. Procurement and Property Management Standards

1. Procurement Standards

For State and local governments, the Institute has adopted the standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular A-102. Institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations will be governed by the standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular A-110.

2. Property Management Standards

The property management standards as prescribed in Attachment N of OMB Circulars A-102 and A-110 apply to all Institute grantees and subgrantees except as provided in section VI.A.18. All grantees/subgrantees are required to be prudent in the acquisition and management of property with grant funds. If suitable property required for the successful execution of projects is already available within the grantee or subgrantee organization, expenditures of grant funds for the acquisition of new property will be considered unnecessary.

K. Audit Requirements

1. Implementation

Each recipient of a Project Grant must provide for an annual fiscal audit. This requirement also applies to a State or local court receiving a subgrant from the State Supreme Court. The audit may be of the entire grantee or subgrantee organization or of the specific project funded by the Institute. Audits conducted in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984 and OMB Circular A-128, or OMB Circular A-133, will satisfy the requirement for an annual fiscal audit. The audit must be conducted by an independent Certified Public Accountant, or a State or local agency authorized to audit government agencies. Grantees must send two copies of the audit report to the Institute. Grantees that receive funds from a Federal agency and satisfy audit requirements of the cognizant Federal agency must submit two copies of the audit report prepared for that Federal agency to the Institute in order to satisfy the provisions of this section.

2. Resolution and Clearance of Audit Reports

Timely action on recommendations by responsible management officials is an integral part of the effectiveness of an audit. Each grantee must have policies and procedures for acting on audit recommendations by designating officials responsible for: (1) Follow-up, (2) maintaining a record of the actions taken on recommendations and time schedules, (3) responding to and acting on audit recommendations, and (4) submitting periodic reports to the Institute on recommendations and actions taken.

3. Consequences of Non-Resolution of Audit Issues

Ordinarily, the Institute will not make a subsequent grant award to an applicant that has an unresolved audit report involving Institute awards. Failure of the grantee to resolve audit questions may also result in the suspension or termination of payments for active Institute grants to that organization.

L. Close-Out of Grants

1. Grantee Close-Out Requirements

Within 90 days after the end date of the grant or any approved extension thereof (see subsection L.2. below), the following documents must be submitted to the Institute by grantees (other than scholarship recipients):

a. Financial Status Report. The final report of expenditures must have no unliquidated obligations and must indicate the exact balance of unobligated funds. Any unobligated/unexpended funds will be deobligated from the award by the Institute. Final payment requests for obligations incurred during the award period must be submitted to the Institute prior to the end of the 90-day close-out period. Grantees on a check-issued basis, who have drawn down funds in excess of their obligations/expenditures, must return any unused funds as soon as it is determined that the funds are not required. In no case should any unused funds remain with the grantee beyond the submission date of the final Financial Status Report.

b. Final Progress Report. This report should describe the project activities during the final calendar quarter of the project and the close-out period, including to whom project products have been disseminated; provide a summary of activities during the entire project; specify whether all the objectives set forth in the approved application or an approved adjustment have been met and, if any of the objectives have not been met, explain why not; and discuss what, if anything, could have been done differently that might have enhanced the impact of the project or improved its operation.

These reporting requirements apply at the conclusion of every grant other than a scholarship.

2. Extension of Close-out Period

Upon the written request of the grantee, the Institute may extend the close-out period to assure completion of the grantee's close-out requirements. Requests for an extension must be submitted at least 14 days before the end of the close-out period and must explain why the extension is necessary and what steps will be taken to assure that all the grantee's responsibilities will be met by the end of the extension period.

VIII. Grant Adjustments

All requests for programmatic or budgetary adjustments requiring Institute approval must be submitted by the project director in a timely manner (ordinarily 30 days prior to the implementation of the adjustment being requested). All requests for changes from the approved application will be carefully reviewed for both consistency with this Guideline and the enhancement of grant goals and objectives. Failure to submit adjustments in a timely manner may result in the termination of a grantee's award.

A. Grant Adjustments Requiring Prior Written Approval

The following grant adjustments require the prior written approval of the Institute:

1. Budget revisions among direct cost categories that (a) transfer grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (b) individually or cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) of the approved original budget or the most recently approved revised budget (see section VII.I.2.d.).

2. A change in the scope of work to be performed or the objectives of the project (see subsection D. below).

3. A change in the project site.

4. A change in the project period, such as an extension of the grant period and/or extension of the final financial or progress report deadline (see subsection E. below).

5. Satisfaction of special conditions, if required.

6. A change in or temporary absence of the project director (see subsections F. and G. below).

7. The assignment of an employee or consultant to a key staff position whose qualifications were not described in the application, or a change of a person assigned to a key project staff position (see section VI.A.2.).

8. A change in or temporary absence of the person responsible for managing and reporting on the grant's finances.

9. A change in the name of the grantee organization.

10. A transfer or contracting out of grant-supported activities (see subsection H. below).

11. A transfer of the grant to another recipient.

12. Preagreement costs (see section VII.I.2.a.).

13. The purchase of automated data processing equipment and software (see section VII.I.2.b.).

14. Consultant rates (see section VII.I.2.c.).

15. A change in the nature or number of the products to be prepared or the manner in which a product would be distributed.

B. Requests for Grant Adjustments

All grantees must promptly notify their SJI program managers, in writing, of events or proposed changes that may require adjustments to the approved project design. In requesting an adjustment, the grantee must set forth the reasons and basis for the proposed adjustment and any other information the program manager determines would help the Institute's review.

C. Notification of Approval/Disapproval

If the request is approved, the grantee will be sent a Grant Adjustment signed by the Executive Director or his or her designee. If the request is denied, the grantee will be sent a written explanation of the reasons for the denial.

D. Changes in the Scope of the Grant

Major changes in scope, duration, training methodology, or other significant areas must be approved in advance by the Institute. A grantee may make minor changes in methodology, approach, or other aspects of the grant to expedite achievement of the grant's objectives with subsequent notification of the SJI program manager.

E. Date Changes

A request to change or extend the grant period must be made at least 30 days in advance of the end date of the grant. A revised task plan should accompany a request for an extension of the grant period, along with a revised budget if shifts among budget categories will be needed. A request to change or extend the deadline for the final financial report or final progress report must be made at least 14 days in advance of the report deadline (see section VII.L.2.).

F. Temporary Absence of the Project Director

Whenever an absence of the project director is expected to exceed a continuous period of one month, the plans for the conduct of the project director's duties during such absence must be approved in advance by the Institute. This information must be provided in a letter signed by an authorized representative of the grantee/subgrantee at least 30 days before the departure of the project director, or as soon as it is known that the project director will be absent. The grant may be terminated if arrangements are not approved in advance by the Institute.

G. Withdrawal of/Change in Project Director

If the project director relinquishes or expects to relinquish active direction of the project, the Institute must be notified immediately. In such cases, if the grantee/subgrantee wishes to terminate the project, the Institute will forward procedural instructions upon notification of such intent. If the grantee wishes to continue the project under the direction of another individual, a statement of the candidate's qualifications should be sent to the Institute for review and approval. The grant may be terminated if the qualifications of the proposed individual are not approved in advance by the Institute.

H. Transferring or Contracting Out of Grant-Supported Activities

No principal activity of a grant-supported project may be transferred or contracted out to another organization without specific prior approval by the Institute. All such arrangements must be formalized in a contract or other written agreement between the parties involved. Copies of the proposed contract or agreement must be submitted for prior approval of the Institute at the earliest possible time. The contract or agreement must state, at a minimum, the activities to be performed, the time schedule, the policies and procedures to be followed, the dollar limitation of the agreement, and the cost principles to be followed in determining what costs, both direct and indirect, will be allowed. The contract or other written agreement must not affect the grantee's overall responsibility for the direction of the project and accountability to the Institute.

State Justice Institute Board of Directors

Robert A. Miller, Chairman, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of South Dakota, Pierre, SD

Joseph F. Baca, Vice-Chairman, Chief Justice (ret.), New Mexico Supreme Court, Albuquerque, NM

Sandra A. O'Connor, Secretary, States Attorney of Baltimore County, Towson, MD

Keith McNamara, Esq., Executive Committee Member, McNamara & McNamara, Columbus, OH

Terrence B. Adamson, Esq., Executive Vice-President, The National Geographic Society, Washington, DC

Robert N. Baldwin, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, National Center for State Courts, Richmond, VA

Carlos R. Garza, Esq., Administrative Judge (ret.), Round Rock, TX

Sophia H. Hall, Administrative Presiding Judge, Circuit Court of Cook County, Chicago, IL

Tommy Jewell, Presiding Children's Court Judge (ret.), Albuquerque, NM

Arthur A. McGiverin, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of Iowa, Ottumwa, IA

Kevin Linskey, Executive Director (ex officio)

Kevin Linskey,

Executive Director.

Appendix A—SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts

Alabama

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Timothy A. Lewis, State Law Librarian, Alabama Supreme Court, Judicial Building, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, AL 36104, [phone], [e-mail].

Alaska

Anchorage Law Library

Ms. Cynthia S. Fellows, State Law Librarian, Alaska State Court Law Library, 303 K Street, Anchorage, AK 99501, [phone], [e-mail].

Arizona

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Lani Orosco, Staff Assistant, Arizona Supreme Court, Staff Attorney's Office Library, 1501 W. Washington, Suite 445, Phoenix, AZ 85007, [phone], [e-mail].

Arkansas

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. James D. Gingerich, Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, Supreme Court of Arkansas, Justice Building, 625 Marshall Street, Little Rock, AR 72201, [phone], [e-mail].

California

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. William C. Vickrey, Administrative Director of the Courts, Administrative Office of the Courts, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, [phone], [e-mail].

Colorado

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Linda Gruenthal, Deputy Supreme Court Law Librarian, 2 East 14th Avenue, Denver, CO 80203, [phone], [e-mail].

Connecticut

State Library

Ms. Denise D. Jernigan, Law Librarian, Connecticut State Library, 231 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, CT 06106, [phone], [e-mail].

Delaware

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. Michael E. McLaughlin, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, Carvel State Office Building, 820 North French Street, 11th Floor, P.O. Box 8911, Wilmington, DE 19801, [phone], [e-mail].

District of Columbia

Executive Office, District of Columbia Courts

Ms. Anne B. Wicks, Executive Officer, District of Columbia Courts, 500 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 1500, Washington, DC 20001, [phone], [e-mail].

Florida

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Elisabeth H. Goodner, State Courts Administrator, Office of the State Courts Administrator, Florida Supreme Court, Supreme Court Building, 500 South Duval Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399, [phone], [e-mail].

Georgia

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. David Ratley, Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, 244 Washington Street, SW., Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30334, [phone], [e-mail].

Hawaii

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Ann Koto, State Law Librarian, The Supreme Court Law Library, 417 South King St., Room 119, Honolulu, HI 96813, [phone], [e-mail].

Idaho

AOC Judicial Education Library/State Law Library

Mr. Richard Visser, State Law Librarian, Idaho State Law Library, Supreme Court Building, 451 West State St., Boise, ID 83720, [phone], [e-mail].

Illinois

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Brenda Larison, Supreme Court of Illinois Library, 200 East Capitol Avenue, Springfield, IL 62701-1791, [phone], [e-mail].

Indiana

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Terri L. Ross, Supreme Court Librarian, Supreme Court Library, State House, Room 316, Indianapolis, IN 46204, [phone], [e-mail].

Iowa

Administrative Office of the Court

Dr. Jerry K. Beatty, Director of Judicial Branch Education, Iowa Judicial Branch, Iowa Judicial Branch Building, 1111 East Court Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50319, [phone], [e-mail].

Kansas

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Fred Knecht, Law Librarian, Kansas Supreme Court Library, Kansas Judicial Center, 301 SW. 10th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66612, [phone], [e-mail].

Kentucky

State Law Library

Ms. Vida Vitagliano, Cataloging and Research Librarian, Kentucky Supreme Court Library, 700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 200, Frankfort, KY 40601, [phone], [e-mail].

Louisiana

State Law Library

Ms. Carol Billings, Director, Louisiana Law Library, Louisiana Supreme Court Building, 400 Royal Street, New Orleans, LA 70130, [phone], [e-mail].

Maine

State Law and Legislative Reference Library

Ms. Lynn E. Randall, State Law Librarian, 43 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333, [phone], [e-mail].

Maryland

State Law Library

Mr. Steve Anderson, Director, Maryland State Law Library, Court of Appeal Building, 361 Rowe Boulevard, Annapolis, MD 21401, [phone], [e-mail].

Massachusetts

Middlesex Law Library

Ms. Linda Hom, Librarian, Middlesex Law Library, Superior Court House, 40 Thorndike Street, Cambridge, MA 02141, [phone], [e-mail].

Michigan

Michigan Judicial Institute

Dawn F. McCarty, Director, Michigan Judicial Institute, P.O. Box 30205, Lansing, MI 48909, [phone], [e-mail].

Minnesota

State Law Library (Minnesota Judicial Center)

Ms. Barbara L. Golden, State Law Librarian, G25 Minnesota Judicial Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, St. Paul, MN 55155, [phone], [e-mail].

Mississippi

Mississippi Judicial College

Hon. Leslie G. Johnson, Executive Director, Mississippi Judicial College, P.O. Box 8850, University, MS 38677, [phone], [e-mail].

Montana

State Law Library

Ms. Judith Meadows, State Law Librarian, State Law Library of Montana, P.O. Box 203004, Helena, MT 59620, [phone], jmeadows@.mt.gov.

Nebraska

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Janice Walker, State Court Administrator, Nebraska Supreme Court, P.O. Box 98910, Lincoln, NE 68509-8910.

Nevada

To be determined

New Hampshire

New Hampshire Law Library

Ms. Mary Searles, Technical Services Law Librarian, New Hampshire Law Library, Supreme Court Building, One Noble Drive, Concord, NH 03301-6160, [phone], [e-mail].

New Jersey

New Jersey State Library

Mr. Thomas O'Malley, Supervising Law Librarian, New Jersey State Law Library, 185 West State Street, P.O. Box 520, Trenton, NJ 08625-0250, [phone], [e-mail].

New Mexico

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Thaddeus Bejnar, Librarian, Supreme Court Library, Post Office Drawer L, Santa Fe, NM 87504, [phone].

New York

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Barbara Briggs, Law Librarian, Syracuse Supreme Court Law Library, 401 Montgomery Street, Syracuse, NY 13202, [phone], [e-mail].

North Carolina

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Thomas P. Davis, Librarian, North Carolina Supreme Court Library, 500 Justice Building, 2 East Morgan Street, Raleigh, NC 27601, [phone], [e-mail].

North Dakota

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Marcella Kramer, Assistant Law Librarian, Supreme Court Law Library, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 182, 2nd Floor, Judicial Wing, Bismarck, ND 58505-0540, [phone], [e-mail].

Northern Mariana Islands

Supreme Court of the Northern Mariana Islands

Ms. Margarita M. Palacios, Director of Courts, Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, P.O. Box 502165, Saipan, MP 96950, [phone], [e-mail].

Ohio

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Ken Kozlowski, Director, Law Library, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, 11th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215-3431, [phone], [e-mail].

Oklahoma

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. Michael D. Evans, State Court Administrator, Administrative Office of the Courts, 1915 North Stiles Avenue, Suite 305, Oklahoma City, OK 73105, [phone], [e-mail].

Oregon

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Kingsley W. Click, State Court Administrator, Oregon Judicial Department, Supreme Court Building, 1163 State Street, Salem, OR 97301, [phone], [e-mail].

Pennsylvania

State Library of Pennsylvania

Ms. Kathleen Kline, Collection Management Librarian, State Library of Pennsylvania, Bureau of State Library, 333 Market Street, Harrisburg, PA 17126-1745, [phone], [e-mail].

Puerto Rico

Office of Court Administration

Alfredo Rivera-Mendoza, Esq., Director, Area of Planning and Management, Office of Court Administration, P.O. Box 917, Hato Rey, PR 00919.

Rhode Island

Roger Williams University

Ms. Gail Winson, Director of Law Library/Associate Professor of Law, Roger Williams University, School of Law Library, 10 Metacom Avenue, Bristol, RI 02809, 401/254-4531, [e-mail].

South Carolina

Coleman Karesh Law Library (University of South Carolina School of Law)

Mr. Steve Hinckley, Director, Coleman Karesh Law Library, University of South Carolina, Main and Green Streets, Columbia, SC 29208, [phone], [e-mail].

South Dakota

State Law Library

Librarian, South Dakota State Law Library, 500 East Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota 57501, [phone], [e-mail].

Tennessee

Tennessee State Law Library

Hon. Cornelia A. Clark, Executive Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, 511 Union Street, Suite 600, Nashville, TN 37219, [phone], [e-mail].

Texas

State Law Library

Mr. Marcelino A. Estrada, Director, State Law Library, P.O. Box 12367, Austin, TX 78711, [phone], [e-mail].

U.S. Virgin Islands

Library of the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands (St. Thomas)

Librarian, The Library, Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands, Post Office Box 70, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 00804.

Utah

Utah State Judicial Administration Library

Ms. Jessica Van Buren, Utah State Library, 450 South State Street, P.O. Box 140220, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-0220, [phone], [e-mail].

Vermont

Supreme Court of Vermont

Mr. Paul J. Donovan, Law Librarian, Vermont Department of Libraries, 109 State Street, Pavilion Office Building, Montpelier, VT 05609, [phone], [e-mail].

Virginia

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Gail Warren, State Law Librarian, Virginia State Law Library, Supreme Court of Virginia, 100 North Ninth Street, 2nd Floor, Richmond, VA 23219-2335, [phone], [e-mail].

Washington

Washington State Law Library

Ms. Kay Newman, State Law Librarian, Washington State Law Library, Temple of Justice, P.O. Box 40751, Olympia, WA 98504-0751, [phone], [e-mail].

West Virginia

Supreme Court of Appeals Library

Ms. Kaye Maerz, State Law Librarian, West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals Library, 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East, Building 1, Room E-404, Charleston, WV 25305, [phone], [e-mail].

Wisconsin

State Law Library

Ms. Jane Colwin, State Law Librarian, State Law Library, 120 M.L.K. Jr. Boulevard, Madison, WI 53703, [phone], [e-mail].

Wyoming

Wyoming State Law Library

Ms. Kathy Carlson, Law Librarian, Wyoming State Law Library, Supreme Court Building, 2301 Capitol Avenue, Cheyenne, WY 82002, [phone], [e-mail].

National

American Judicature Society

Ms. Deborah Sulzbach, Acquisitions Librarian, Drake University, Law Library, Opperman Hall, 2507 University Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50311-4505, [phone], e-mail: [e-mail].

JERITT

Dr. Maureen E. Conner, Executive Director, The JERITT Project, Michigan State University, 1407 S. Harrison Road, Suite 330 Nisbet, East Lansing, MI 48823-5239, [phone], [phone] (fax), [e-mail], Web site: http://jeritt.msu.edu.

National Center for State Courts

Ms. Joan Cochet, Library Specialist, National Center for State Courts, 300 Newport Avenue, Williamsburg, VA 23185-4147, [phone], [e-mail].

National Judicial College

Mr. Randall Snyder, Law Librarian, National Judicial College, Judicial College Building, MS 358, Reno, NV 89557, [phone], [e-mail].