[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6603-6608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3510]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Discretionary Cooperative Agreements to Support the Demonstration
and Evaluation of Safe Communities Programs
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.
ACTION: Announcement of discretionary cooperative agreements to support
the demonstration and evaluation of Safe Communities Programs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
announces the second year of a discretionary cooperative agreement
program to demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe
Communities concept for traffic safety initiatives. The Safe
Communities program offers communities a new way to control traffic
injuries. This approach recognizes that traffic-related deaths and
injuries are primarily a local community problem that is best solved at
the local level. The Safe Communities program adopts a comprehensive
injury control approach to address traffic injury problems. Recognizing
that traffic fatalities are only a small part of the total traffic
injury problem, Safe Communities focuses on non-fatal injuries as well
as fatal injuries to define the traffic safety problem, and asks who is
paying the costs of the injuries. Four characteristics define the Safe
Communities approach: Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and
linkage where possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in
setting priorities, and movement towards an integrated and
comprehensive injury control system.
In 1996 under Phase I of this demonstration and evaluation program,
cooperative agreements were awarded to the Greater Dallas Injury
Prevention Program and the East Carolina University/Eastern Carolina
Injury Prevention Program. This notice solicits applications from
public and private, non-profit, and non-for-profit organizations,
governments and their agencies, or a consortium of these organizations
that are interested in developing, implementing and evaluating the Safe
Communities approach in their community. The funds from this program
may only be used to support traffic safety activities within the larger
context of community injury control efforts. Private contractors,
working on behalf of community groups are not eligible to apply.
Preference will be given to those applications which help NHTSA meet
its needs to obtain geographic diversity, urban/rural mix, diversity in
lead organization(s); potential for replication in other communities,
and/or other factors deemed relevant by NHTSA.
NHTSA anticipates awarding two (2) demonstration and evaluation
projects for a period of three years each as a result of this
announcement.
[[Page 6604]]
DATES: Applications must be received at the office designated below by
3:00 PM on or before May 1, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted to the National Highway
Traffic Administration, Office of Contracts and Procurement (NAD-30),
ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301, Washington, D.C.
20590. All applications submitted must include a reference to NHTSA
Cooperative Agreement Program No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Interested
applicants are advised that no separate application package exists
beyond the contents of this announcement.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General administrative questions along
with requests for copies of the OMB Standard Form 424-Application for
Federal Assistance and Certified Assurances may be directed to Amy
Poling, Office of Contracts and Procurement. All questions and requests
may be directed by e-mail at apoling@nhtsa.dot.gov or, if necessary, at
202-366-9552. Programmatic questions relating to this cooperative
agreement program should be directed to Barbara Sauers, Traffic Safety
Programs, NHTSA, NTS-22 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590,
by e-mail at bsauers@nhtsa.dot.gov or, if necessary, at 202-366-0144.
NHTSA intends to post this Federal Register Announcement and OMB
Standard Form 424 on the NHTSA home page at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov
under ``What's Hot''.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The past several decades witnessed dramatic advances in medical
care and shifts in health behaviors. Despite the advances, injuries
remain a major health care problem, and the leading cause of death for
persons from age 1 to 44. Fatalities, however, are only a small part of
the total injury picture. For each injury-related death, there are 19
injury hospitalizations and over 300 injuries that require medical
attention. These injuries account for almost 10 percent of all
physician office visits and 38 percent of all emergency department
visits. For an individual, these injuries can vastly diminish quality
of life. For society, injuries pose a significant drain on the health
care system, incurring huge treatment, acute care and rehabilitation
costs.
Motor vehicle injuries, in particular, are the leading cause of all
injury deaths and the leading cause of death for each age from 5
through 27. Motor vehicle-related injuries are the principal cause of
on-the-job fatalities, and the third largest cause of all deaths in the
U.S. Only heart disease and cancer kill more people. However, far more
people are injured and survive motor vehicle crashes than die in these
crashes. In 1995, for example, while over 41,000 persons were killed in
motor-vehicle related incidents and almost 3.4 million were injured.
These injured persons often required medical care and many required
long-term care. The costs of these injuries are enormous, over $150.5
billion each year in economic costs and $17 billion in medical costs.
The vast majority of these injuries and deaths are not acts of
fate, but are predictable and preventable occurrences. Injury patterns,
including traffic-related injury patterns, vary by age group, gender,
and cultural group. There are also seasonal and geographic patterns to
injury. Once the populations, types and locations of crashes and causes
of injuries that are associated in the community with increased
severity and high costs are identified, interventions can be designed
to address these factors specifically.
Safe Communities: A New Generation of Community Programs
American traffic safety advocates have traditionally worked in
partnerships with many organizations and groups to achieve a
successful, long and established history in preventing and reducing
traffic-related injuries and fatalities. For over 15 years, community-
based traffic safety programs have been and remain an effective means
for identifying local crash problems and providing local solutions.
Building on past success, the Safe Communities program offers
communities a new way to control traffic injuries. This approach
recognizes that traffic-related deaths and injuries are primarily a
local community problem. Effective preventive efforts require a
coordinated approach involving Federal, State and local organizations.
The Safe Communities approach adopts a comprehensive injury control
model to address traffic injury problems within the context of all
injuries. Recognizing that traffic fatalities are only a small part of
the total traffic injury problem, Safe Communities focus on fatal and
non-fatal injuries (as opposed to only fatalities) to define the
traffic safety problem, and ask who is paying the costs of the
injuries. Safe Communities recognize the importance of citizens in
identifying community problems and solutions, as well as the importance
of partnerships in implementing solutions to community problems.
The Safe Communities approach represents an evolutionary (rather
than revolutionary) way in which community programs are established and
managed. Four characteristics define the Safe Communities approach:
Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and linkage where
possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in setting
priorities, and movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury
control system. Each of these characteristics is described below.
Analysis of Multiple Data Bases is critical to Safe Communities
because addressing traffic-related injuries suggests that not only
fatalities are reduced, but injuries and health care costs as well.
This shift from an emphasis on fatalities to one emphasizing injuries
and cost reduction means that different data bases need to be
identified. Police crash reports tell only part of the story. Analysis
of data from health departments, hospitals, EMS providers, business,
rehabilitation programs, and insurance companies helps project
managers', community leaders' and others' understanding of the
magnitude and consequences of traffic injuries and monitoring progress
in reducing the problem. Even more effective is data linkage which can
provide opportunities, for example, to identify when and where young
people in the community drink and drive, their risk for impaired
driving which result in crashes, the types of injuries which occur, and
how much these injuries cost the community compared to other types of
injuries caused by young people who drink. Thus, countermeasures can be
designated to address these risk factors (e.g., traffic safety and
violence prevention efforts can join forces to reduce youth access to
alcohol).
Expanded partnerships are important to solve local injury problems
effectively through comprehensive and collaborative strategies. Traffic
safety advocates have long recognized that traffic problems are too
complex and resources too limited for them to solve in isolation. As a
result, over the years, the traffic safety community has worked with
law enforcement, emergency medical services, local government, schools,
courts, business, health departments, and community and advocacy
organizations to reduce traffic injuries. Safe Communities continue to
work with these existing partners, but also seek to expand the
partnership base to involve actively the medical, acute care and
rehabilitation communities. These groups, which have traditionally been
focused on treating disease, need to be engaged as integral partners in
preventing injuries.
[[Page 6605]]
Safe Communities enlist business and employers as full partners in
community injury prevention activities. Employers need to understand
how traffic-related injuries contribute to their overall costs, and how
participation in community-wide injury prevention efforts can help them
reduce their own costs due to motor vehicle injuries. Through
partnerships and collaboration, Safe Communities spread program
ownership and delivery systems throughout the community. Finally, Safe
Communities provide an opportunity for traditional traffic safety
partners--such as law enforcement and schools--to understand better the
linkages among risk-taking behaviors. For example, individuals who
commit traffic offenses may also be involved with other kinds of
problem or illegal behaviors.
Citizen involvement and input are essential to establish community
priorities for identified problems. Town meetings and other techniques
are routinely used to solicit wide-spread citizen input and feedback
about community injury problems. Citizens are actively involved
identifying, designing and implementing solutions to their injury
problems. Citizens actively participate in problem identification,
assume responsibility and ownership for shaping solutions, and share in
both the successes and challenges of their program.
Movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury control
system incorporates the elements of prevention, acute care, and
rehabilitation as active and essential participants insolving community
injury problems. This is the crux of the Safe Communities approach, and
often one or more of these groups have not traditionally been involved
in addressing community traffic injury problems or their involvement
has focused only on prevention and not their role in the overall
system. Involvement of the three component groups will not happen
overnight or in every community, but it is something to strive for over
time.
The ``evolutionary shift'' from current programs to Safe
Communities is summarized in Table 1 (below). Community partners
participate as equals in developing solutions, sharing success,
assuming programming risks, planning for self-sufficiency, and building
a community infrastructure and process for continual improvement of
community life through reduction of traffic-related injuries,
fatalities, and costs.
Table 1.--New Thinking About Community Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current program emphasis Evolving program emphasis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing fatalities....................... Reducing fatal and non-fatal
injuries & health care and
social costs.
Traffic safety as the objective........... Traffic safety integrated
into broader injury control
efforts.
Prevention-based solutions................ Systems-based solutions
(integration of prevention,
acute care,
rehabilitation).
Agency-based delivery system.............. Community/citizen ownership.
Traditional traffic safety................ Adds new or expanded health,
injury, partners business,
and government partners.
Administration evaluation................. Impact evaluation/cost
benefit analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Objectives
Under this cooperative agreement the effectiveness of the Safe
Communities approach for traffic safety initiatives shall be
demonstrated and evaluated to determine the impact on reducing traffic
related injuries and associated costs to the community. Specific
objectives for this cooperative agreement program are as follows:
1. Work with existing community traffic safety and/or injury
control coalitions and apply the defining characteristics to establish
a Safe Communities approach for reducing traffic injuries.
2. Use community and/or state data, as appropriate, to define the
community's traffic injury problem within the context of the
community's overall injury problem. Where possible, population based
data are preferred. Data sources in addition to police crash reports
are required for this purpose. The costs of traffic injuries to the
community (which may include emergency medical services, acute care,
hospital, medical, rehabilitation, insurance, lost wages, and workmen's
compensation) are to be documented.
3. Actively engage community residents in defining both the
community's traffic injury problem as well as solutions to the problem.
The grantee shall develop strategies for ensuring wide-spread citizen
involvement throughout the project.
4. In addition to traditional traffic safety partners (e.g., law
enforcement) identify and actively engage health care (both provider
and payer) and business partners in the Safe Communities approach. The
grantee is responsible for ensuring active and committed participation
from these two sectors.
5. Implement a program to reduce traffic-related injuries in the
community. The programs could address any area of traffic safety
including alcohol-impaired driving, use of occupant restraints,
speeding, emergency medical services, or pedestrian or bicycle safety.
The intervention program should be based on data and citizen input and
should actively engage all sectors of the community, including health
care, business, local government, law enforcement, schools, and media.
The program should also include elements of an integrated injury
control system (prevention, acute care and rehabilitation) and/or plans
for how the program will move towards this type of approach.
6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe Communities approach in
reducing traffic-related injuries and associated costs. In addition,
evaluate the process of establishing a Safe Communities approach (what
works, what does not work, how to engage partners, how to overcome
barriers, challenges, how to run challenges into opportunities, etc.)
Availability of Funds
A total of $800K is available in FY97 to fund this program. Two (2)
demonstration and evaluation projects will receive awards of $400K each
to be used over a period of three years. In each project, $150K must be
dedicated to evaluation activities. Given the amount of funds available
for this effort, applicants are strongly encouraged to seek other
funding opportunities to supplement the federal funds and include cost-
sharing plans and commitments.
Period of Performance
The period of performance for this cooperative agreement will be
three years from the effective date of award.
NHTSA Involvement
NHTSA will be involved in all activities undertaken as part of the
cooperative agreement program and will:
1. Provide a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR)
to participate in the planning and management of this Cooperative
Agreement and to coordinate activities between the Grantee and NHTSA.
2. Provide information and technical assistance from government
sources within available resources and as determined appropriate by the
COTR.
[[Page 6606]]
3. Serve as a liaison between NHTSA Headquarters, Regional Offices
and others (Federal, state and local) interested in the safe
communities approach and the activities of the grantee.
4. Stimulate the transfer of information among grant recipients and
others engaged in safe communities activities.
Eligibility and Other Applicant Requirements
Applications may be submitted by public and private, non-profit and
not-for-profit organizations, and governments and their agencies or a
consortium of the above. Thus, universities, colleges, research
institutions, hospitals, other public and private (non- or not-for-
profit) organizations, and State and local governments are eligible to
apply. Private contractors working on behalf of community groups are
not eligible to apply. Interested applicants are advised that no fee or
profit will be allowed under this cooperative agreement program. These
demonstration projects will require extensive collaboration among each
of these various organizations in order to achieve the program
objectives. It is envisioned during the pre-application process, these
various organizations will designate one organization to prepare and
submit the formal application.
Applicant Procedures
Each applicant must submit one original and five copies of the
application package to: NHTSA, Office of Contracts and Procurement
(NAD-30), ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301,
Washington, DC 20590. Applications must be typed on one side of the
page only, and must include a reference to NHTSA Cooperative Agreement
No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Unnecessarily elaborate applications beyond what
is sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this
invitation are not desired. Only complete packages received by 3:00 PM
on or before May 1, 1997 will be considered.
Application Content
Applicants for this program must include the following information:
1. The application package must be submitted with OMB Standard Form
424 (Rev. 4-88, including 424A and 424B), application for Federal
Assistance, with the required information filled in and certified
assurances signed. While the form 424A deals with budget information,
and Section B identified Budget Categories, the available space does
not permit a level of detail which is sufficient to provide for a
meaningful evaluation of the proposed total costs. A supplemental sheet
shall be provided which presents a detailed breakdown of the proposed
costs, as well as any costs which the applicant indicates will be
contributed locally in support of the demonstration project.
2. The application shall include a program narrative statement
which addresses the following information in separately labeled
sections:
a. A table of contents including page number references.
b. A description of the community in which the applicant proposes
to work. For the purposes of this program, a ``community'' includes a
city, town or county, small metropolitan area, or even a large
neighborhood (i.e., it does not have to correspond with a political
jurisdiction). It should be large enough so that the program can have a
demonstrable effect on injuries, while not so large as to lose a sense
of community. The description of the community should include, at a
minimum, community demographics, the community's traffic injury problem
using the most recent three years of local and/or state data available
(including data from multiple sources such as police, hospital, EMS,
vital records, etc.), a list of data sources available, existing
traffic safety or injury control coalitions, community resources and
political structure and commitment.
c. A preliminary description of the community's traffic injury
problem, including injury, fatality and cost data. If chosen for award,
the applicant will be required to conduct a more thorough problem
analysis that includes input from citizens residing in the community.
Therefore, a plan on how this more thorough problem analysis will be
conducted and how citizen input will be obtained is required in the
proposal.
d. A description of the goal of the program and how the grantee
plans to establish a Safe Communities program in the proposed site.
What will the grantee do to ``move'' the site towards the Safe
Communities concept? What will be different from existing community
programs? How will the grantee obtain citizen involvement in setting
program priorities? What health and business partners will be engaged?
How will they be engaged? What will they do?
e. An implementation plan that describes the types of interventions
or activities proposed to achieve the objectives of the Safe
Communities program. Given the community motor vehicle injury problem
analysis, the implementation plan needs to include a description of the
types of interventions that would be considered and how citizens would
be engaged in identifying the interventions. The implementation plan
must also include a discussion of how the applicant will develop the
final implementation plan; how the plan will relate to the identified
problems; how citizens, business, health/medical organizations, and
others will be involved in the delivery of the program; what action the
community will undertake to reach its objectives; how the intervention
will be delivered; how delivery will be monitored; and the expected
results from the intervention. The implementation plan should address
elements from prevention, acute care and rehabilitation (integrated
comprehensive injury control system) and/or how the program will move
towards inclusion of these elements. The implementation plan shall also
address prospects for program continuation beyond the period of Federal
assistance.
f. A proposed evaluation plan (both quantitative and qualitative)
based on the initial data analysis that describes the kinds of
questions to be addressed by the evaluation design, what the outcome
measures are expected to be, how they will be measured, the methodology
for collecting the data, how often data will be collected, and how the
data will be analyzed. The plan should indicate how action undertaken
by the community will be linked with outcome measures. It is important
that the area encompassed by the Safe Communities program coincide with
the population covered by the data to be used in the evaluation, or
that the data systems allow the disaggregation of the relevant
population.
g. A description of the full working partnership that has been or
will be established to conduct the Safe Communities program. The
application shall describe all the partners (from prevention, acute
care and rehabilitation) that will participate in the program (e.g.
local government, law enforcement, health care, injury prevention,
insurance, business, education, media, citizens) and what the role for
each partner will be. A complete set of letters of commitment written
by major partners, organizations, groups, and individuals proposed for
involvement in this project shall detail what each partner is willing
to do over the course of the project period (e.g. provide data, staff,
resources, etc.) Form letters that do not specifically address these
issues are not acceptable. Letters from owners of the data (injury,
cost,
[[Page 6607]]
other) required for successful completion of this project must also be
submitted. These letters must indicate that the data required for the
project are accessible to the project team.
h. A description of how the project will be managed, both at the
applicant level and at the community level. The application shall
identify the proposed project manager and any support personnel
considered critical to the successful accomplishment of this project,
including a brief description of their qualifications and respective
organizational responsibilities. The roles and responsibilities of the
grantee, the community and any others included in the application
package shall be specified. The proposed level of effort in performing
the various activities shall also be identified. A staffing plan and
resume for all key project personnel shall be included in the
application.
i. A separately-labeled section with information demonstrating that
the applicant meets all of the special competencies:
(1) Knowledge and familiarity with data sources such as police
crash and crime reports, EMS files, emergency department data, hospital
discharge data, and injury cost data (i.e. cost of injuries to the
community); and injury surveillance systems (including analyzing and
linking such data files). Availability of and accessibility to relevant
data in their community from police crash reports and at least one or
two injury data sources.
(2) Capable of:
i. Designing comprehensive program evaluations;
ii. Collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative
iii. Synthesizing, summarizing and reporting evaluation results
which are usable and decision-oriented.
(3) Experience in working in partnership with others, especially
business, health care systems (providers and payers) and government
organizations, media and with local citizens in implementing solutions
to community problems.
(4) Experience in implementing injury control programs (prevention,
acute care, rehabilitation) at the community level.
j. A dissemination plan that describes how the results of this
demonstration and evaluation project will be shared with interested
parties. The dissemination plan should include preparation of a final
report and process manual (see reporting requirements), 1-2 briefings
per year at the NHTSA headquarters, presentation at one or more
national meetings per year (e.g. APHA, Lifesavers, etc.), and if
appropriate, preparation and submission of at least one paper for
publication in a professional journal.
Application Review Process and Evaluation Factors
Each application package will initially be reviewed to confirm that
the applicant is an eligible recipient and that the application
contains all of the items specified in the Application Contents section
of this announcement. Each complete application from an eligible
recipient will then be evaluated by an evaluation committee. The
applications will be evaluated using the following criteria:
1. Understanding of the Community (10%). The extent to which the
applicant has demonstrated an understanding of the community, including
the community's demographics, traffic safety problem, resources
(including data), and political structure. The extent to which the
applicant is knowledgeable about community data sources, is able to use
the data sources to define the community traffic injury problem, and
has demonstrated the community's need for a safe communities approach
to controlling traffic injuries and the community's willingness to
commit and participate in the program. The extent to which the
applicant has access to the community and potential target populations
in the community.
2. Problem Identification (20%). The extent of the applicant's
capability to identify through the Safe Communities process the
significance of the traffic injury problem in relation to other types
of injuries which occur in the community; and to identify among those
residents involved in motor vehicle crashes the populations, types and
locations of crashes, human factors issues (e.g., occupant restraint
usage rates), types of vehicles, and the types of injuries which are
most associated with increased injury severity and high care costs for
this community. The problem identification will also be evaluated with
respect to the potential for the Safe Communities approach to prevent
or reduce the traffic injury problem.
3. Goals, Objectives and Implementation Plan (15%). The extent to
which the applicant's goals are clearly articulated; the objectives are
time-phased, specific, measurable, and achievable; and the goals and
objectives relate to identified problems. The extent to which the
implementation plan will achieve an outcome-oriented result that will
reduce traffic-related injuries and costs to the community. The
implementation plan should address what the applicant proposes to
implement in the community and how this will be accomplished. The
implementation plan will be evaluated with respect to its feasibility,
realism, and ability to achieve the desired outcomes as well as
prospective plans for program continuation beyond the period of Federal
assistance.
4. Collaboration (15%). The extent to which the applicant has
demonstrated experience in a full working partnership for data
acquisition and analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation of a
community program; and the extent to which such a partnership has been
established among the applicant and critical components in the
community representing prevention, acute care and rehabilitation. Has
the applicant specified who will be involved in the program and what
the role of each partner will be? The extent to which the applicant has
demonstrated access to partners deemed critical to this effort, such as
health care, business, and local government. Has the applicant shown
that potential partners are committed to working with the program? In
what way will potential partners participate? The extent to which the
applicant describes how citizens will be actively engaged in the safe
communities program.
5. Evaluation Plan (15%). How well the applicant describes the
proposed evaluation design and the methods for measuring the processes
and outcomes of the proposed interventions (countermeasures). How well
will the evaluation plan be able to measure the effectiveness of the
safe communities approach? Does the applicant provide sufficient
evidence that the proposed community partnership is committed to
evaluation? Are there sufficient data sources and is there sufficient
capacity to collaborate with appropriate community program partners to
ensure access to data; identify/create and test appropriate
instruments; and collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data
for measuring the effectiveness of the safe communities approach? How
well does the applicant ensure the availability of staff and facilities
to carry out the submitted evaluation plan?
6. Special Competencies (15%). The extent to which the applicant
has demonstrated knowledge and experience accessing and using relevant
data sources, designing and implementing comprehensive program
evaluations (using both qualitative and quantitative data),
implementing injury control programs, and working in partnership with
others on community programs.
7. Project Management and Staffing (10%). The extent to which the
[[Page 6608]]
proposed staff, including management and program staff and community
partners, are clearly described, appropriately assigned, and have
adequate skills and experiences. The extent to which the applicant has
the capacity and facilities to design, implement, and evaluate a
complex and comprehensive community program. The extent to which the
applicant provides details regarding the level of effort and allocation
of time for each staff position. Did the applicant submit an
organizational chart and resume for each proposed staff member? Does
the applicant provide a reasonable plan for accomplishing the
objectives of the project within the time frame set out in this
announcement?
Special Award Selection Factors
Applicants are strongly encouraged to seek funds for the purpose of
cost-sharing from other federal, State, local and private sources to
augment those available under this announcement. Applications which
include a commitment of such funds will be given additional
consideration.
For those applications that are evaluated as eligible for award,
consideration for final award will be made on the basis of geographic
diversity, urban/rural mix, organizational diversity and potential for
program replication.
Terms and Conditions of Award
1. Prior to award, each grantee must comply with the certification
requirements of 49 CFR part 20, Department of Transportation New
Restrictions on Lobbying, and 49 CFR part 29, Department of
Transportation government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-
procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug Free Workplace
(Grants).
2. Reporting Requirements and Deliverables:
a. Quarterly Progress Reports should include a summary of the
previous quarter's activities and accomplishments, as well as the
proposed activities for the upcoming quarter. Any decisions and actions
required in the upcoming quarter should be included in the report. The
grantee shall supply the progress report to the Contracting Officer's
Technical Representative (COTR) every ninety (90) days, following date
of award.
b. Problem Identification Report, Program Implementation and
Evaluation Plan: The grantee shall submit a problem identification
report, program implementation and evaluation plan no more than 9
months after award of this agreement, or as soon as the Safe
Communities program has completed the problem identification activity,
has determined what traffic safety problem or problems will be
addressed, and determined what program or programs will be implemented
to reduce the traffic-related injuries. The NHTSA COTR will review and
comment on this plan.
The plan should describe the problem identification effort (data
sources used, how analyzed, and the results including costs of traffic
injuries to the community), how the communities traffic injury problems
and proposed solutions were determined, how input was obtained from
citizens, and how the program will be evaluated. This final evaluation
plan should describe how the effectiveness of the Safe Communities
program will be determined and how the process issues involved in
establishing and implementing a Safe Communities program will be
determined.
c. Dissemination Plan:
i. Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual: The grantee shall
prepare a Draft Final Report that includes a description of the
community (including the traffic safety problem and data sources to
support the problem), partners, intervention strategies, program
implementation, evaluation methodology and findings from the program
evaluation. The grantee shall also prepare a Draft Process Manual
describing what happened in the community in establishing a safe
communities approach to traffic injury. In terms of technology
transfer, it is important to know what worked and did not work, under
what circumstances, and what can be done to avoid potential problems in
implementing community programs. This Process Manual shall contain the
``lessons learned'' in establishing a safe community. The grantee shall
submit the Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to the COTR 90
days prior to the end of the performance period. The COTR will review
each draft document and provide comments to the grantee within 30 days
of receipt of the documents.
ii. Final Report and Process Manual: The grantee shall revise the
Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to reflect the COTR's
comments. The revised documents shall be delivered to the COTR on or
before the end of the performance period. The grantee shall supply the
COTR one camera-ready copy, one computer disk copy in WordPerfect
format, and four additional hard copies of each revised document.
iii. Meetings and Briefings: The grantee shall plan for one to two
briefings per year at NHTSA headquarters in Washington, D.C. with the
COTR and other interested parties. The grantee shall also participate
in one or two technology sharing/problem solving sessions with the
NHTSA COTR, other interested parties and the other Safe Communities
grantees per year in Washington, D.C. or some central location. In
addition, the grantee shall plan for a presentation at one or more
national meetings (e.g., APHA, Lifesavers . . .) per year.
iv. Professional Journal Paper: The grantee shall prepare and
submit at least one paper for publication in a professional journal if
deemed appropriate by the COTR.
3. During the effective performance period of cooperative
agreements awarded as a result of this announcement, the agreement as
applicable to the grantee, shall be subject to the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration's General Provisions for Assistance
Agreements.
Issued on: February 7, 1997.
James Hedlund,
Associate Administrator for Traffic Safety Programs.
[FR Doc. 97-3510 Filed 2-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
