[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 64 (Monday, April 5, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16556-16571]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8158]
[[Page 16555]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Justice
_______________________________________________________________________
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
_______________________________________________________________________
Safe Start Demonstration Project and Evaluation of the Safe Start
Initiative; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 1999 /
Notices
[[Page 16556]]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
[OJP (OJJDP)-1217]
RIN 1121-ZB51
Safe Start Demonstration Project and Evaluation of the Safe Start
Initiative
AGENCY: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office
of Justice Programs, Justice.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), pursuant to Pub. L. 105-277, October
19, 1998, Making Appropriations for the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies for the Fiscal
Year Ending September 30, 1999, and for Other Purposes, is issuing a
program announcement and solicitation for applications from all
communities to create a comprehensive system that will improve the
access, delivery, and quality of services for young children at high
risk of exposure, or who have been exposed to violence. OJJDP is also
issuing an evaluation announcement and solicitation for applications to
conduct an evaluation of this initiative.
The FY 1999 appropriation will provide up to 12 sites with funding
of up to $250,000. These awards will be made through a competitive
grant process, to be administered by OJJDP. The FY 1999 appropriation
also will provide funding up to $1 million for a national evaluator to
conduct an evaluation of the sites.
DATES: Applications under this program must be received no later than 5
p.m. ET June 14, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Applications should be submitted to the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
c/o Juvenile Justice Resource Center, 2277 Research Boulevard, Mail
Stop 2K, Rockville, MD 20850. Interested applicants need to obtain the
Safe Start Initiative Application Package, which includes the two
program announcements, application instructions, and forms. The package
is available online at OJJDP's Web site: www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org (click on
the Grants and Funding prompt). The package is also available by mail
(call OJJDP's Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 and request SL 334) or via
e-mail (at puborder@ncjrs.org). For packages being mailed, please allow
3-5 days for delivery.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THE SAFE START INITIATIVE, CONTACT:
Michelle Avery, Program Manager, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, 810 Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC 20531,
202-514-5084; e-mail: Averym@ojp.usdoj.gov. For further information
regarding the Evaluation of the Safe Start Initiative, contact Dean
Hoffman, Program Manager, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, 810 Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC 20531, 202-353-9256;
e-mail: Hoffmand@ojp.usdoj.gov. [These telephone numbers are not toll-
free numbers.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose
The purpose of the Safe Start demonstration project is to develop a
demonstration initiative to prevent and reduce the impact of family and
community violence on young children (primarily from birth to 6 years
of age). The project seeks to create a comprehensive service delivery
system by helping communities to expand existing partnerships among
service providers in the fields of early childhood education/
development, health, mental health, family support and strengthening,
domestic violence, substance abuse prevention and treatment, crisis
intervention, child welfare, law enforcement, courts, and legal
services. This comprehensive service delivery system should improve
access to, delivery of, and quality of services for young children at
high risk of exposure to violence or who have been exposed to violence,
1 along with their families, and their caregivers, at any
point of entry into the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Exposure to violence'' means being a victim of abuse,
neglect, or maltreatment or a witness to domestic violence, or other
violent crime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
Throughout America, millions of children are exposed to violence at
home, in their neighborhoods, and in their schools.
In 1996 nearly 3 million children were the subjects in 2 million
reports of child abuse and neglect (Poe-Yamagata, 1997). A 1994 study
found that 1 out of every 10 children treated in the Boston City
Hospital primary care clinic had witnessed a shooting or stabbing
before the age of 6. Almost all (94 percent) of the children had been
exposed to multiple forms of violence, and half had been exposed to
violence within the past month. Half of the children witnessed such
violence in the home, and half witnessed it in the streets. The average
age of these children was 2.7 years (Taylor et al., 1994).
It has been estimated that each year in the United States between
3.3 million (Carlson, 1984) and 10 million (Straus, 1991) children
witness violence in the home, including a range of behaviors from
intense verbal arguments to fatal assaults with guns and knives.
Family violence also encompasses violence between siblings.
According to one study, 77 percent of children under the age of 9 had
recently been violent toward a sibling (Steinmetz, 1977). Another study
found that 80 percent of children committed violent acts toward their
siblings every year (Straus, Gelles, and Steinmetz, 1980).
Young children are particularly at risk of and affected by violence
and exposure to violence.
In a comparison study of census data from five cities, domestic
violence was shown to have occurred disproportionately in homes with
children under the age of 5. Children in this age group also were more
likely than older children to witness multiple acts of domestic
violence and substance abuse (Fantuzzo et al., 1997). Research
indicates that because of their age and limited ability to understand
violent episodes, younger children are more vulnerable to the impact of
victimization. Children's exposure to violence and maltreatment is
significantly associated with increased depression, anxiety,
posttraumatic stress, anger, greater alcohol and drug abuse, and lower
academic achievement (Zero to Three, 1994). Exposure to violence shapes
how they remember, learn, and feel. Numerous studies cite the
connection between abuse or neglect of a child and later development of
violent and delinquent behavior (Thornberry, 1994; Wright and Wright,
1994; Widom, 1992). Children who experience violence either as victims
or as witnesses are at increased risk of becoming violent themselves.
This danger is greatest for the youngest children, who depend almost
completely on their parents and other caregivers to protect them from
trauma.
Children exposed to violence do not receive adequate intervention
or treatment to address harmful aftereffects.
According to the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1995), more than 90
percent of children who were abused or neglected did not get the
services they needed. Rarely are such children provided treatment or
help in dealing with the traumatic effects of maltreatment. Also, too
often, referrals to victim services
[[Page 16557]]
made during investigations of domestic violence and other violent crime
are limited to the adult victim rather than focusing on both adult and
child victims and witnesses, leaving these children without services.
There is broad consensus that current juvenile justice practice is
often inadequate in preventing or intervening in exposure of children
to violence. Services are crisis oriented and divide children and
families into distinct, often arbitrary categories. Communication among
service providers is often poor, resulting in an inability to treat
families holistically, meet their needs, and develop comprehensive
solutions (Melaville and Blank, 1993).
There is a movement toward a coordinated system response.
As the juvenile justice field continues to recognize prevention as
central to its mission and to focus its prevention efforts on those
factors that place children at risk for both victimization and
delinquent activity, practitioners are increasingly recognizing that
the segmentation and fragmentation of community service delivery
systems are serious obstacles to effective services for at-risk and
victimized children (Gerry and Morrill, 1990). In addition,
practitioners and policymakers are beginning to recognize the
effectiveness of engaging communities in addressing problems related to
delinquency and violence.
The Federal Government has a critical role, not only in
reorganizing and restructuring its own activities to promote and
facilitate such reorganization on the community level, but also in
stimulating community-based systems improvement by providing financial
and technical assistance to communities engaged in collaborative
processes (Conly and McGillis, 1996). In recent years, Federal agencies
have funded a variety of programs to promote collaboration among
service providers for children and families. For example:
In 1994, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP) within the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) provided
initial support to document the Child Development-Community Policing
(CDCP) Program model, which was developed by the Yale University Child
Study Center and the New Haven Department of Police Services in 1991.
Since then, with continuing support from OJJDP and support from DOJ's
Office for Victims of Crime and Violence Against Women Grants Office,
CDCP has expanded its scope of work and replicated its model in other
cities. The program provides assistance to children and adolescents who
have been exposed to or victimized by family or community violence and
consequently placed at significant psychological and developmental
risk. Through this partnership, police and mental health professionals
participate in activities such as cross-disciplinary training, seminars
on child and adolescent development, policing strategies, case
conferences, and 24-hour consultation services.
In 1997, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), in conjunction with the Casey Family Program,
established the Starting Early/Starting Smart initiative. This public/
private collaboration integrates mental health and substance abuse
prevention and treatment services with primary health care or early
childhood care settings for children from birth to 7 years.
In 1995, OJJDP began SafeFutures, a 5-year demonstration
program in six communities. Under this program, communities are
implementing comprehensive community programs designed to reduce youth
violence, delinquency, and victimization through a continuum of care
system for youth ages 0-18 and their families. This continuum assists
communities in responding to the needs of youth at critical stages of
their development through a range of prevention, intervention,
treatment, and sanctions programs.
In 1996, several components of the Office of Justice
Programs within the Department of Justice joined to initiate the Safe
Kids/Safe Streets program. This 5\1/2\-year demonstration program,
designed to foster coordinated community responses to child abuse and
neglect and break the cycle of early childhood victimization and later
criminality, is currently being implemented in five sites in the United
States.
HHS's Comprehensive Community Mental Health Services for
Children and their Families Program includes intensive community-based
services for children with serious emotional disturbances and their
families based on a multiagency, multidisciplinary approach involving
both the public and private sectors. The key goal of the program is to
develop comprehensive interagency systems of care, including
collaboration between a variety of providers, e.g., juvenile justice,
child welfare, schools, health, and mental health providers.
Through these programs, and others, communities have established
formal collaboration between two or more service providers in order to
improve service delivery to children, their families, and caregivers.
To help communities expand partnerships to include additional
providers, in fiscal year 1999 Congress appropriated $10 million to
establish the Safe Start initiative. These funds will assist
communities that are doing the type of work identified in the five
examples above. (Eligibility is not limited to the communities
mentioned above-see the ``Eligibility Requirements'' section below.)
Safe Start will provide up to 12 communities with funds to develop and
coordinate services to prevent and reduce the impact of family and
community violence on young children. The program seeks to accomplish
this goal by enhancing and expanding existing community partnerships
focused on this problem through integrating public and private support.
Goal
The goal of this project is to create a holistic approach to
prevent and reduce the harmful effects of exposure to violence on young
children by improving access to, delivery of, and quality of services
to children and responding to the needs of children and their families
at any point of entry into relevant (e.g., legal, social services,
medical) systems.
Objectives
In order to achieve its goal, the Safe Start demonstration project
seeks to develop a comprehensive and coordinated community system for
preventing and responding to the harmful effects of exposure to
violence on young children by:
Assessing the extent and nature of children's exposure or
risk of exposure to violence and the circumstances within the community
under which this exposure occurs.
Increasing awareness within communities and among
professionals of the impact of exposure to violence on children and
ways to prevent children's exposure to violence.
Increasing children's access to quality prevention
programs.
Improving identification, referral, and interventions for
children, along with their families.
Facilitating collaboration and coordination of services to
improve cross-agency prevention and response, increasing professional
cross-training, and reducing barriers to accessing services.
Providing specific training and support to direct service
providers in preventing and dealing with the
[[Page 16558]]
psychological and developmental effects of children's experience with
violence.
Addressing the multiethnic, racial, and gender needs of
young children who are at high risk of or who have been exposed to
violence.
Fostering and facilitating organizational change that
promotes improvements in a variety of prevention, protection/
intervention, and treatment services provided by relevant agencies and
service providers.
Developing and implementing specific protocols,
procedures, and research-based programs for responding to the needs of
children at high risk of, or exposed to, violence and strengthening
violence prevention programs designed to reduce such exposure.
The approach through which grantees under the Safe Start initiative
are to achieve these objectives will involve:
Expanding a comprehensive planning and implementation
effort that must substantially include representatives from relevant
public and private agencies and programs who have a thorough
understanding of child development, violence, and its impact on
children.
Assessing and addressing the current levels and
seriousness of critical health, mental health, and educational
consequences and needs of children at high risk of, or exposed to,
violence in their communities.
Assessing and addressing the policies, procedures, and
services directed at the needs of children who are at high risk of, or
exposed to, violence in the community.
Identifying and reducing gaps, deficiencies, and barriers
in prevention and intervention policies, procedures, and services.
Identifying and accessing training and technical
assistance that supports the coordinated prevention and intervention
services, policies, and procedures.
Program Strategy
OJJDP will competitively select up to 12 communities to receive
cooperative agreements for up to 5\1/2\ years under the Safe Start
initiative.
Project Phases
The strategy for establishing this comprehensive service delivery
system involves a multiyear development process (see chart below). The
initiative will be conducted in three phases.
During Phase I, which will correspond to the first 12 months of the
initiative, selected sites are to conduct assessment, planning, and
initial development activities, which are discussed in detail below.
Applicants are required to include a strategy for the Phase I
assessment and planning as part of the initial application for
selection as a Safe Start site. Selected sites will need to
successfully complete their Safe Start 5-year strategic plan and an 18-
month program implementation plan by month 9 of Phase I to be eligible
for funding in Phase II. The 5-year strategic plan and 18-month program
implementation plan will serve as major components of the application
for continuation funding for Phase II.
Applicants will begin Phase II in month 12 upon OJJDP approval of
the 5-year strategic plan and 18-month implementation plan. In Phase
II, sites will begin implementation of their Safe Start activities and
services. Specifically, Phase II consists of 18 months of initial
implementation, training, capacity building, and evaluation of those
activities and services planned during Phase I.
Phase III includes the remaining three annual budget periods of the
5\1/2\-year initiative. In budget periods 3 and 4, sites will focus on
full implementation and maintenance of the program based on the plan
developed during Phase I and initial implementation of Phase II. By
budget period 4, sites will also actively identify and implement ways
to sustain improvements achieved under Safe Start by conducting long-
range planning beyond the conclusion of the initiative and developing
alternative funding. Finally, in budget period 5, sites will continue
full implementation of services and activities, finalize long-range
planning, and ensure sustainability.
Project Funding
Selected applicants will be awarded up to $670,000 for the
first budget period of 18 months. (Note that the budget periods and
phases of this project overlap). Selected applicants will be able to
use up to $250,000 for Phase I assessment, planning, and initial
development activities.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Applicants are requested to submit award requests for the
amount of $670,000; however, selected grantees will only have access
to $250,000 for planning through month 12. The remaining $420,000,
plus additional funds under a supplemental award for initial
implementation in Phase II will be made available in month 12 upon
successful completion of Phase I and OJJDP approval of plans. See
``Award Amount'' and ``Award Period'' sections below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For applicants that successfully complete Phase I, the
remaining funding available from the first budget period of up to
$420,000 will be available along with $670,000 of funding from the
second budget period of 12 months to support activities during Phase II
(months 13-30) for a total of up to $1,090,000 of funding support per
site. Grantees will receive the highest level of funding for the
demonstration program in Phase II. Funding will vary based on a variety
of factors including size of the target area and population, site-
specific needs identified and supported in the Phase I plan and to be
implemented during Phase II, and successful completion of the products
and activities identified for Phase I. These funds will cover any
infrastructure building, startup costs, and training, evaluation, and
program services needed to enhance existing resources.
Funding in Phase III (budget periods 3, 4, and 5) will be
up to $670,000 per site in year 3 and will decrease each subsequent
budget period. Selected sites will be expected to ensure that local
resources are leveraged to sustain the project during years 4 and 5 of
Phase III and beyond the 5\1/2\-year project period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase Years Activities Funding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase I (12 mos.)................... Year 1:.....................
months 0-9................ Assessment & planning....... $250,000
months 10-12.............. xlInitial development.......
month 12.................. xlOJJDP review of site plans
completed.
Phase II (18 mos.).................. Year 2: months 13-30........ Initial implementation...... 420,000
+670,000
1,090,000
---------------------------------------------
Phase III (36 mos.)................. Year 3: months 31-42........ Full Implementation......... 670,000
Year 4: months 43-54........ Sustainability.............. >670,000
[[Page 16559]]
Year 5 months 55-66......... ............................ >670,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding in this demonstration initiative is intended to supplement
existing services provided through Federal, State, local, and tribal
sources and to be used for the purpose of coordinating and
supplementing an existing system of care. In each community's system of
care, the primary objective is to capitalize on and reshape existing
staff time and services while also filling service gaps.
Target Population and Area
This demonstration initiative has been developed to target young
children (primarily from birth to 6 years of age) who are at high risk
of exposure or who have been exposed to violence, along with their
families and other caregivers. The target age range is somewhat
flexible based on the justified needs of a community. Applicants need
to specify what particular age range is targeted, how and why this
range was identified and is appropriate to the geographic area to be
served, and how ``high risk of exposure to violence'' and ``exposed to
violence'' are defined in the community.
Sites funded under this initiative must address the multiethnic,
racial, and gender-specific needs of young children who are at high
risk of or who have been exposed to violence. Sites may direct their
efforts to the entire jurisdiction or to specific geographical areas of
special need. However, the identified need must be clearly justified as
described below. For instance, applicants may choose to direct program
efforts toward children in one or more communities within a larger
urban, rural, or tribal area.
Applicants must justify the target area and population in terms of
both need and appropriateness to the accomplishment of program
objectives. Applicants must show that targeted geographic areas
represent identifiable communities or neighborhoods where the
investment of Safe Start resources will result in appreciable
improvements for children who live there. Appropriateness of the target
area also must be justified in part by demonstrating particular
community strengths or existing resources from which to build Safe
Start.
Collaboration/Coordination
Collaboration and coordination are central components of the Safe
Start program. At the national level, OJJDP has developed this
initiative in coordination with other Federal agencies and offices,
including the Department of Health and Human Services and DOJ's
Violence Against Women Grants Office and Office for Victims of Crime.
At the local level, Safe Start sites are expected to demonstrate and
continue coordination and collaboration with other Federal, State, and
local agencies; national and community foundations; and private sector
programs, including community-based organizations and faith
communities. To ensure that a comprehensive service delivery system is
provided, key partnerships must be established and expanded. A list of
relevant partners and service providers follows to highlight the full
range of disciplines and sectors to be involved. Primary partners
represent key points of entry for prevention and intervention;
secondary partners can provide support resources as needed.
Primary partners include the following:
Battered women's shelters and domestic violence advocacy
agencies.
Child advocacy centers.
Courts: Judges, attorneys, guardians ad litem, court
appointed special advocates, administrative staff in the dependency/
juvenile courts, family courts, domestic violence courts, and drug
courts.
Domestic violence, family violence prevention, and hotline
services.
Early childhood development and child care.
Faith leaders and communities.
Head Start and Early Head Start.
Law enforcement.
Mental health services.
Primary health care providers, hospitals, and emergency
medical services.
Schools.
Social services and child protective services.
Substance abuse prevention and treatment services.
Secondary partners include the following:
Business and private sector.
Housing.
Income maintenance personnel (Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families; General Assistance; Supplemental Security Income;
Women, Infants, and Children Program, etc.).
Labor.
Media.
Transportation.
Under Safe Start, communities will be expected to develop a
coordinated prevention and response system composed of core services
identified below under the ``Activities/Services'' section. Additional
primary and secondary partners will vary based on the particular needs
and existing service delivery systems of individual communities.
Grantees will be selected based in large part on their demonstration of
active partnerships and their ability to expand and sustain the
partnerships to broadly encompass partners needed in the community.
Collaboratives should display the following elements:
A shared, focused objective that is narrow enough to have
an impact yet broad enough to engage the interests of multiple agencies
(since children at high risk of, or exposed to, violence have critical
health, mental health, education, safety, housing, and transportation
needs).
Leadership and ongoing support from the highest agency
levels.
Dedicated administrative budget and staff to support the
initiative's goals and objectives.
Systemwide implementation that is sufficiently broad in
scope to gain sustained policy-level attention and impact key agency
practices.
Demonstrated ability to leverage public and private
funding to ensure commitment during the project and sustainability of
improved services and coordination after Safe Start funding has ended.
A focus on outcomes, with measurable, tracked, and
evaluated progress toward planned goals and objectives.
Ongoing support and technical assistance to promote
community coordination.
Experience in problem solving to enhance individuals' and
agencies' abilities to prevent violence and trauma before they occur.
Activities/Services
To accomplish the goal of Safe Start, communities will have to
improve their service delivery systems (e.g., by improving
identification, assessment, and referral mechanisms; addressing
confidentiality issues; implementing organizational change; enhancing
information sharing and management information systems; creating
protocols and multidisciplinary teams, etc.), and they will have to
implement programs
[[Page 16560]]
that research has proven effective (e.g., Functional Family Therapy,
Nurse Home Visitation).
Through the Safe Start planning (Phase I) and implementation
(Phases II and III) process, communities should build on existing
services to develop a coordinated prevention and response system that
contains the following minimum core components: a protocol between
police, mental health, medical, and child protective services; child
advocacy centers; early childhood development and education; family
strengthening services; a home visitation program; domestic violence
services for battered mothers whose children are at high risk of
exposure, or exposed to, intimate partner violence; substance abuse
prevention and treatment services; and model dependency courts. The
process of planning and implementation that selected sites will be
required to perform is described below.
Phase I--Planning and Initial Development
During Phase I, selected sites will be required to prepare a 5-year
strategic plan that outlines how the local community will create an
integrated prevention and response system of care for preventing and
reducing the impact of exposure to violence on children along with
their families or caregivers. This plan should provide a framework for
activities, policy changes, and resource adjustments for the remaining
years of the award and beyond to continue the community assessment and
planning as part of ongoing maintenance of the effort. The 5-year
strategic plan should provide the overarching structure/framework for
all efforts to improve the prevention of and a community response to
children's exposure to violence. It is both a state-of-the-community
report on children at high risk of, or exposed to, violence and a step-
by-step guide for action.
Phase I planning also should include identifying and assessing
existing community services, including gaps in services; identifying
and assessing all resources currently used and available for use
(human, technological, and fiscal); assessing financial strategies; and
assessing existing policies and procedures within and across agencies
and providers responding to children who are at high risk of, or
exposed to, violence along with their families.
To accomplish these purposes, the strategic plan must provide a
data-driven risk and resource assessment about the current community in
quantifiable terms-numbers, percentages-that can inform decisionmakers
and serve as baseline measures against which to judge progress. It must
also delineate a list action steps--a blueprint--that, among other
items, includes responsibilities (by individual and organization), and
timelines for achieving an integrated service delivery system.
The strategic plan must substantially involve key leaders (e.g.,
policy, administrative, and community) necessary for a comprehensive
prevention system and response to exposure to violence in terms of
assessment information, outcomes, policies, financing and programming
strategies, staffing, training, coordination, and services. Services
that are administered at a city, county, tribal, or State level must be
identified and involved. The strategic plan should include the basic
elements of any planning document such as the vision, mission, goals,
objectives, assessment findings (including a description of the current
continuum), and a list of prioritized actions for the next 5 years.
These prioritized actions should include the target date by which they
will be implemented and the agency/persons that have lead
responsibility for them. It is expected that prioritized actions will
include a range of strategies such as policy and systems changes,
service delivery changes (e.g., expanded service hours), service
integration, program enhancements, and new programming (including but
not limited to those strategies supported under the Safe Start grant
funds). These strategies should occur at all of the following levels:
Policy, legislative, management, and frontline service delivery.
In addition to the 5-year strategic plan, sites will also be
required to submit an 18-month detailed initial implementation plan
(application) for funding for Phase II.
Phase I--Deliverables Required of Selected Grantees To Proceed to Phase
II
Assessment and planning activities conducted by sites during Phase
I should position selected sites to begin implementation of improved
service delivery to children and their families in Phases II and III.
By month 9 of Phase I, participants are expected to have developed and
submitted a comprehensive 5-year strategic plan that builds on previous
activities in the community that includes, at a minimum, the following:
Vision Statement (5 years).
Description of Planning Process (participants and planning
methods).
Defined Target Area and Population.
Community Assessment (based on data, where appropriate).
--Map of current services in the delivery system for both
prevention and reduction.
--Identification of resources currently invested in the issue of
exposure.
--Identification of priority risk and protective factors.
--Identification of gaps in the current service delivery system.
--Analysis of community strengths, resources, and opportunities
available to support the system.
--Identification of service barriers among key service providers,
including availability, accessibility, and appropriateness.
--Identification of program and policy priorities for putting an
integrated system in place.
--Description of plan for maintaining and updating initial
assessment findings.
Goals and Objectives for Prevention and Reduction of the
Impact of Exposure.
Action Plan.
--Policy and system changes to address priorities for prevention
and reduction. Services and programming (including Safe Start-funded
activities and other services).
--Task and timeline plan.
Plan for Measuring Progress.
--Plan for ongoing assessment.
--Benchmarks for measuring progress.
--Description of who will participate in measuring progress and how
decisions about necessary changes and refinements will be made.
Training and Technical Assistance Plan (see below).
Local Evaluation Plan (see below).
Statement of Collaborative Phase I Plan Development.
--Because the strategic plan is to be the product of a
collaborative, communitywide planning process including all
policymakers involved in the prevention and reduction of exposure to
violence, selected sites will need to include a signed statement in
which each supporting party attests to his or her substantial
involvement in the development of the strategic plan. The statement
must contain each person's original signature, typed/printed name,
address, telephone number, and affiliation (agency head, parent,
youth). In addition, signed statements of the staffing group members
who participated and a description of the roles of the key leaders, in
the preparation of the strategic plan are required.
In addition, by month 9 of Phase I, sites will be required to
submit a
[[Page 16561]]
detailed implementation plan (i.e., full application) for Phase II of
the Safe Start initiative. The implementation plan/application must
detail the activities and strategies to be implemented, and provide a
timeline and a budget for the 18 months of initial program startup and
implementation. The Phase II application must include a training and
technical assistance plan and a local evaluation plan. All applicants
will be eligible for continuation in Phase II if performance in Phase
I, the strategic plan, and the implementation plan/application merit
support for implementation funding.
Applicants will also be required to provide memorandums of
understanding (MOU's), cosigned by all participating agencies, that
describe in detail agency commitments and activities each agency will
perform to improve service coordination and delivery.
These deliverables will be due to OJJDP by month 9 of the program
to ensure adequate time for review and approval by OJJDP for
continuation of and funding for Phase II. The remaining 3 months of the
first year should be used in preparation for Phase II in such
activities as training, policy development, and other developmental
activities.
Selected sites also will be required to provide interim planning
reports and draft products throughout Phase I to allow for a formative
feedback process intended to facilitate successful completion of Phase
I.
Phase II--Initial Implementation (Months 13-30)
Once each selected site has successfully completed Phase I, OJJDP
will provide additional funds for Phase II. During this phase, OJJDP
expects communities to build upon existing services to begin developing
a coordinated prevention and response system including the core
components listed above under ``Collaboration/Coordination'' and
``Activities/Services.'' If an applicant demonstrates that a particular
component is not needed or has been adequately developed in its
community, funding is flexible enough to allow for greater emphasis in
another service or systems change area. Although the Safe Start
initiative does not require selected sites to implement prescribed
models for particular program components, sites must use programs and
services that have been demonstrated through research to prevent and
minimize the impact of exposure to violence. Applicants will be
expected to justify and demonstrate the effectiveness of programs or
practices proposed for implementation or expansion. (Numerous
information resources on research-based practices and programs are
available from OJJDP through the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse. The
National Clearinghouse for Child Abuse and Neglect also can provide
information. Contact information is listed on page 52.)
Deliverables for Phase II will be developed during Phase I in
consultation with OJJDP, and written guidance from OJJDP will be
provided annually throughout Phase II.
Activities will include the following:
Implementation of professional training, cross-training,
and development at the individual and staff/organizational level
regarding prevention, identification, and intervention techniques to
address the needs of children at risk of/exposed to violence.
Implementation of strategies for improving identification,
referral, and intervention.
Development and implementation of cross-system
coordination and protocols.
Implementation of any new research-based service models to
fill identified gaps.
Increasing the quality of, and access to, services.
Developing management information systems and improving
case management.
Training and Technical Assistance
A comprehensive national training and technical assistance
(national TTA) component will be identified by OJJDP and will support
the communities selected to participate in Safe Start. These
communities will receive a range of OJJDP-funded support including
assessment, coordination, brokering, and provision of TTA in both
content and systems improvement areas.
In addition, of the up to $250,000 in funding that can be awarded
for planning, sites are expected to set aside $50,000 for local TTA to
support community-specific needs and build on existing local TTA
resources. Sites are encouraged in Phase I to use the TTA set-aside to
access support for ongoing facilitation of and consultation on the
strategic planning process.
In Phase II, local intensive training across disciplines for
community teams on children's exposure to violence, treatment options,
and interventions in various settings should be provided by a team of
experts identified by the agencies, including professionals experienced
in working with parents, childcare workers, child protective service
providers, battered women's advocates/workers, community policing
officers, probation officers, parole officers, prosecutors, judges,
pediatricians, emergency room doctors, nurses, school personnel,
educators, clergy, public housing officials, and university professors.
Again, this training should build on what is available under existing
contracts. This training plan should be developed with the assistance
of the National TTA Coordinator during planning under Phase I.
Evaluation
Safe Start evaluations will track each selected site's process and
the impact of developing a coordinated service delivery system through
(1) a cross-site process evaluation; (2) a cross-site impact
evaluation; and (3) rigorous local impact evaluations. These
evaluations will be conducted at both the national and the local level.
The objectives of both the national and local evaluation will adjust to
the shifting demands of each Safe Start phase and are intended to
document Safe Start activities across the life of the initiative.
During Phase I, the evaluation will focus on process by documenting
the process and results of planning meetings, progress of the risk and
resource analysis, identification of gaps, problems encountered, etc.
As the initiative moves into Phase II and III implementation, the
evaluation also will be concerned with outcomes related to the impact
of new and/or enhanced services and changes in policy and procedures on
the lives of children and families exposed to violence. This process
will be guided by the development of a Safe Start logic model for each
community (described in more detail below).
The National Evaluator
The Safe Start national evaluator will be selected by OJJDP through
a separate, competitive process. Program applicants must agree to
comply with the national evaluation requirements. Because it is
important that the experiences of all Safe Start communities be
measured in a common fashion, allowing for generation of knowledge
across all communities, the national evaluator is responsible for
designing two cross-site evaluation efforts. The first, the cross-site
process evaluation, is intended to document and analyze the process of
effective implementation of the Safe Start initiative to provide
information to strengthen and refine the initiative within and across
sites. It is important to identify factors that contribute to or impede
the successful implementation
[[Page 16562]]
of the initiative in each community. The second, the cross-site impact
evaluation, is intended to assess the extent to which the initiative is
meeting its goals and measure the amount of change that is taking
place. Finally, the national evaluator is responsible for providing
technical assistance to local evaluators in designing local evaluation
plans. These plans must focus on conducting more rigorous evaluations
that use experimental or quasi-experimental designs. These plans will
be reviewed by the national evaluator and OJJDP. OJJDP will approve
local evaluation plans.
Local Evaluation Requirements
Each Safe Start grantee must select and set aside ample funds (no
less than 10 percent) of the project budget to fund a local evaluator
to provide evaluation support throughout the life of the initiative. In
subsequent years of the initiative, the percentage of the project
budget allocated to the local evaluator may increase. Safe Start
applicants must make a strong and demonstrated commitment to
incorporating evaluation activities into their planning and
implementation activities. The overall evaluation effort is intended to
document and assess the initiative as it develops in each community and
becomes an integral component of the initiative by measuring progress,
suggesting adjustments, and keeping the initiative outcome focused.
The process of selecting a local evaluator will vary across
jurisdictions according to each jurisdiction's policies. That is, some
jurisdictions may be required to competitively select a local evaluator
while others may have different mechanisms. Applicants should describe
the requisite process in their jurisdictions and incorporate this
selection process into their Phase I (planning and initial development)
timeline. Applicants are encouraged to reach out to universities and
other local organizations to fill this responsibility. The national
evaluator will develop a common set of criteria to use in selecting a
local evaluator. This guidance is intended to convey the same set of
expectations to all potential local evaluators.
Local evaluators have six areas of responsibility: (1) Developing a
Safe Start logic model for their community; (2) participating in cross-
site process evaluation activities; (3) participating in cross-site
impact evaluation activities; (4) designing and conducting local Safe
Start impact evaluations; (5) providing technical assistance to the
local Safe Start initiative; and (6) contributing to report writing.
These are described in more detail below.
Develop a Logic Model for the Local Safe Start Initiative. During
the planning phase, Safe Start projects and their respective local
evaluators will be required to work collaboratively with the national
evaluator to develop a local Safe Start logic model. A logic model is a
description of how project inputs, activities, and outputs are expected
to accomplish the goals and objectives of a project. In other words, a
logic model maps out the activities that will occur over the life of
the initiative and ties these to the outcomes desired by the project
staff.
Participate in Cross-Site Process Evaluation Activities. Local
evaluators will work closely with the national evaluator to complete
cross-site process evaluation activities. As discussed above, the
national evaluator is responsible for designing this cross-site effort.
Local evaluators will have input into this design but will ultimately
be required to participate in accordance with the agreed-upon structure
and methods. For example, the local evaluator must participate by using
any instruments designed by the national evaluator for use by all Safe
Start sites, following agreed-upon information-sharing procedures, and
maintaining contact with the national evaluator and OJJDP.
Participate in Cross-Site Impact Evaluation Activities. The
national evaluator is responsible for guiding the design of the cross-
site impact evaluation, which is designed to assess the extent to which
the initiative is meeting its goals and the amount of change that is
taking place. The national and local evaluator are expected to develop
a strong working relationship and a mutual commitment to measure Safe
Start outcomes. The local evaluator will work with the national
evaluator to identify impacts that can be measured as the initiative
develops. For example, if the Safe Start community adopts new policies
in police referrals to family counseling services, the national
evaluator may require that the local evaluator and other local Safe
Start project staff monitor the number of referrals made after the
policy takes effect. In this same vein, the national evaluator may
require that archival data be collected to provide a baseline. It
should be noted that all of these requirements will be central to
implementing a rigorous evaluation of Safe Start and will embed the
process and impact evaluations in the program's development,
implementation, and refinement. Local evaluators must participate in
the design and implementation of the cross-site impact evaluation in
accordance with procedures developed by the national evaluator.
Design and Conduct Local Impact Evaluations. As Safe Start
communities begin to implement specific programs (e.g., Nurse Home
Visitation) and the need arises to assess the impact of Safe Start
services on individuals (i.e., children and their families), the
national evaluator will be able to provide technical assistance to
local evaluators in designing evaluation plans that can accomplish this
task.
The local evaluator and local Safe Start project staff will be
expected to make a strong and demonstrated commitment to designing
evaluations that can accomplish this level of assessment. Furthermore,
these local plans must focus on conducting more rigorous evaluations
that use experimental or quasi-experimental designs. The national
evaluator will provide guidance in developing these plans and report on
the progress of each community to OJJDP. The local evaluator will
submit an evaluation plan to the national evaluator, who will then
submit the plan to OJJDP. OJJDP will give final approval for all local
impact evaluation plans.
To assist in accomplishing this task, the national evaluator will
be required to develop a Safe Start Self-Evaluation Tool Kit, modeled
after OJJDP's Title V: Delinquency Prevention Program: Community Self-
Evaluation Workbook, for use by each site.
Provide Technical Assistance to Local Safe Start Initiative. The
local evaluator must be able to assist the local Safe Start project
staff to develop an implementation plan that is outcome based and data
driven. The goal of this relationship is to develop a strong
partnership in which program designers and evaluators work together to
clarify goals and objectives and make a strong commitment to measuring
progress in systematic, scientific ways. To foster this relationship,
the local evaluator is expected to actively participate in all stages
of the local Safe Start initiative.
Contribute to Report Writing. Local evaluators will be called upon
by the national evaluator to help report on activities in their
communities. The reports may be used, for example, to produce cross-
site Safe Start newsletters that focus on the larger effort or specific
areas of interest such as developing strategies to include schools in
the effort, sharing information across agencies, and recruiting
interest from private organizations in the community.
[[Page 16563]]
Eligibility Requirements
OJJDP invites applications from all communities.3 Public
agencies, including State agencies, local units of government, and
tribal governments, are invited to apply as lead applicants for a
collaborative, community-based initiative. Private agencies and
organizations may apply as coapplicants and collaborative partners but
not as lead applicants and must agree to waive any profit or fee. Joint
applications from two or more eligible applicants are welcomed;
however, one applicant must be clearly indicated as lead and the others
indicated as coapplicants. Applicants must be applying on behalf of a
collaborative group of agencies working to prevent and address the
impact of exposure to violence or interested in expanding the
collaboration to the issue of exposure. Communities that are attempting
to integrate more than one collaborative initiative are strongly
encouraged to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A community is any set of contiguous neighborhoods within an
urban area or one or more adjacent counties, towns, townships,
parishes, or villages; tribal lands or reservations; or other
general purpose subdivisions of a State that shares a preponderance
of interests, needs, services, and governance structures as related
to the prevention and reduction of the negative impacts of
children's exposure to violence. See also definitions for urban,
rural, and tribal categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 12 applicants will be selected from urban, rural, and tribal
categories. Applicants will compete for award in each of these three
distinct categories (e.g., all tribal applicants will compete only
against applications eligible under the tribal category). Applicants
must comply with one of the following definitions based on the most
recent Census data,4 and must identify the application as
urban, rural, or tribal:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ To determine if a jurisdiction is within a metropolitan
area, visit the Census Bureau's Web site at www.census.gov/
population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urban: Any area that lies inside a metropolitan area (MA),
as designated by the Office of Management and Budget using the Census
of Population and Housing data, and that has a population of not less
than 100,000.
Rural: Any area that lies outside the boundaries of an MA,
as designated by the Office of Management and Budget using the Census
of Population and Housing data, and that has a population of not less
than 10,000 and not more than 100,000.
Tribal government: Federally recognized tribes or
Confederated Tribes on a reservation. Confederated Tribes are two or
more tribes grouped under a single government by treaty or Executive
Order. Eligible tribes must have a tribal government serving a
reservation population of not less than 5,000, and a tribal court.
Applicants must demonstrate an established collaborative group--or
the ability and commitment to expand coordination between two or more
entities to other parties--and an infrastructure for overseeing the
initiative. The selected communities should build upon any existing
projects relevant to this initiative, such as the following:
Office of National Drug Control Policy and OJJDP's
Community Anti-Drug Coalitions.
Department of Justice's Title V Community Prevention
Grants, Safe Kids/Safe Streets, Comprehensive Communities, Weed and
Seed, Child Development/Community Policing, or Violence Against Women
Grants Office sites.
Empowerment Zones/Enterprise Communities.
Department of Health and Human Services' Comprehensive
Community Mental Health Services for Children and their Families;
Starting Early/Starting Smart, Head Start, and Early Head Start; and
Maternal Child Health Bureau's Leadership Education Projects.
Department of Education's Safe and Drug-Free Schools.
Department of Agriculture's Children, Youth and Families
At Risk training.
Department of Housing and Urban Development's Hope VI.
Selection Criteria
Applicants must submit a project narrative describing the overall
approach to the Safe Start program, including a description of the
conceptual and organizational framework for the collaborative approach
and a detailed strategy for planning in Phase I.
All applicants will be evaluated and rated by a peer review panel
according to the selection criteria outlined below. Applicants must use
the selection criteria headings that appear below as the headings for
their program narrative and present information in that order. The
selection criteria will be used to determine the extent of each
applicant's responsiveness to program application requirements,
compliance with eligibility requirements, indicators of need (including
high rates of children exposed to violence), organizational capability,
and thoroughness and innovation in responding to strategic issues
related to project implementation. Staff and peer reviewer
recommendations are advisory only, and the final award decision will be
made by the OJJDP Administrator, taking into consideration geographic
diversity and other considerations. As part of this final selection, a
select group of finalists may be visited by a team of Federal officials
to make final determinations about the awards.
Problem(s) To Be Addressed (10 points)
Applicants must provide a discussion of children's exposure to
violence in the target community. This discussion must address the
nature and extent of exposure to violence, including the factors in the
community that put children at high risk of exposure to violence.
Applicants should provide indicators or measures of the extent of the
problem based on current local data such as crime, justice, health, and
economic statistics. This information, in addition to data obtained
during the assessment of Phase I, will be used as a baseline against
which the progress and effectiveness of the applicant's efforts to
prevent and reduce the effects of children's exposure to violence will
be measured. As part of this section, applicants also should identify
current community efforts and resources to reduce the effects of
exposure to violence on children, including gaps in community response/
service delivery. Applicants should indicate their knowledge of how and
why coordination among their specific community entities can be
effective in addressing children at high risk of exposure to violence
and the effects on children of exposure to violence.
Applicants should organize and provide this information in the
following manner:
Section One--Description of the Community and Target Population
a. Describe the geographic area, size of population, age range to
be served, general population characteristics, and ethnic composition
of the community participating in the Safe Start program. Explain how
and why the targeted community was identified and defined.
b. Describe the governmental structure and major agencies servicing
young children, including but not limited to law enforcement, the
courts (e.g., domestic relations and dependency courts), social
services, and health and mental health services. Provide a brief
overview of responsibilities and relationships that currently exist,
including availability of services and case management processes.
[[Page 16564]]
Section Two--Assessment of Community Strengths and Weaknesses
a. Provide data on specific risk factors for children's exposure to
violence, such as high rates of crime, drug abuse, poverty, child abuse
and neglect, prevalence of intimate partner violence/domestic violence,
and other factors identified in the community. Describe all local
baseline data being collected and analyzed. Indicate any information
gaps regarding risk factors or difficulties in assessing them.
b. Describe the areas of greatest need. What are the gaps in
existing services?
c. Describe what resources are available to the community to
address the identified risk factors.
d. Discuss/describe current operations and response to children at
high risk of, or exposed to, violence.
e. Discuss community strengths and weaknesses.
Goals and Objectives (10 points)
Outline the collaborative's vision for preventing and ameliorating
the impact of exposure to violence, describing how the involved systems
and agencies will operate upon conclusion of the planning and
implementation phases. Applicants will be judged on a clear, far-
reaching, yet realistic, vision statement.
Applicants must provide a clear discussion of the proposed project
goals and objectives as they logically relate to the needs, resources,
and capabilities of their communities (which applicants should list in
response to the section above, ``Problems To Be Addressed'') in
relation to the long-range 5-year vision. In addition, applicants
should outline specific goals and objectives for Phase I planning that
result in the attainment of the Phase I deliverables set forth in the
``Project Strategy'' section of the solicitation. Objectives must be
quantified, measurable, and attainable within the timeframes of the
initiative phases. Applicants are reminded that Phase I is 12 months,
but deliverables are due to OJJDP at month 9.
Project Design (20 points)
Applicants must describe their strategy for planning. The planning
process and the major activities to be undertaken in the development of
the implementation plan should be described stating the specific steps
to be used during the first 12 months of the project. The steps should
illustrate how the process will incorporate activities underway;
coordinate and leverage services; identify and review services,
existing gaps, policies and procedures, and barriers to services;
identify human, fiscal, and technological resources; assess system
function through case-level analysis; identify existing data sources
and conduct a thorough data-driven assessment; and use this information
to develop a strategy that minimizes duplication and inefficiencies and
maximizes cooperation, coordination, and collaboration. The plan also
should address local evaluation activities such as data collection,
assessment, and planning for Phase I; development of a logic model; and
local evaluation design. The plan must include a timeline or milestone
chart that details not only the major activities and events but also
the action steps and tasks associated with implementing the strategy to
plan. The timeline should identify specific staff responsible or job
functions required for completing each task.
Specifically, for Phase I, applicants should:
List the collaborative partners including service
providers who will participate in the planning and implementation
process. Applicants will be judged on clear evidence of broad, high-
level community involvement in the planning and implementation process.
Identify the lead agency.
Describe the process by which agencies plan to work
together to design a coordinated service delivery system. Applicants
will be judged on (1) the extent to which they have initiated planning
and implementation of a comprehensive service system for children
exposed to violence and/or are in a position to build on current
efforts including expansion of collaborative partnerships in other
related areas, and (2) the ability and willingness on the part of key
leaders to leverage existing resources, create new sources of support,
make policy and procedural changes, and sustain activities. Please
describe in detail the vision for ensuring linkages and integration at
the direct service level by all involved agencies to provide a
coordinated system of care for children exposed to violence. Include a
description of the coordination mechanisms, both human and
technological, such as interagency staffing groups, integrated case
management systems, management information systems, joint intake and
assessment procedures, referrals, etc.
Describe how information is to be collected, used,
coordinated, maintained, and managed. Also, please explain how children
first will be identified as in need of services and through which
contacts children will first receive services.
Describe existing services and programs currently
operating in the target community.
Describe the plan for training and technical assistance in
Phase I.
Describe the local evaluation plan and incorporate it into
the Phase I timeline/workplan (this should include a description of the
process for selecting and contracting a local evaluator; data
collection, assessment, and planning for Phase I; development of a
logic model; and local evaluation design).
Describe the developmental activities to be conducted in
months 9-12.
Management and Organizational Capability (40 points)
Applicants should use this section to describe a sound governance
and operating structure capable of carrying out the proposed initiative
and to demonstrate the following: community readiness, an effective
team management structure for the initiative involving the lead agency
and the collaborative partners, and a strong organizational capability
by the lead agency commensurate with the scope of work outlined in this
solicitation. These elements and their share of the 40 points available
under this criterion are discussed below.
Section One--Community Readiness (10 points)
Describe how the proposed vision and project design will build on
and/or fit within current and past communitywide planning processes to
achieve the initiative's objectives. Discuss the community's history of
collaboration and planning as it addressed or addresses children's
exposure to violence (or related issues, such as child abuse and
neglect and domestic violence). Include a description of the
participants, major milestones, and the nature and process of the
collaboration. Clarify what has been done, what is in process, and what
remains to be done. Describe the infrastructure upon which Safe Start
will be developed. Applicants should demonstrate the existence,
viability, and accomplishments to date of multidisciplinary
arrangements whereby various agencies in a jurisdiction are working
cooperatively or collaboratively to improve the community's response to
children and families, especially if in the area of exposure to
violence. Applicants must also document that the collaborative or
cooperative groups represent all the relevant stakeholders needed to
reduce the impact of exposure in the target community. This involvement
should include atypical resources and
[[Page 16565]]
stakeholders such as grassroots organizations, parents, and community
leaders. Applicants will be judged on the presence of structures and
agreements (such as a range of local human resources and financial
commitments) to ensure collaboration and coordination in planning,
implementing, and evaluating an integrated system of care and the
participation of all sectors of the community in the initiative.
Applicants also should demonstrate evidence of favorable policies
and/or legislation that characterizes the political and administrative
environments and gives evidence of political or administrative support
for the proposed collaborative effort. Give examples of actual
favorable policies or legislation in appendix D (discussed below).
Applicants must include documentation and letters of agreement,
such as copies of MOU's and/or letters of collaboration/coordination,
from key agencies that specifically describe the commitments made by
each participating agency in appendix F (discussed below).
Section Two--Management (15 points)
Outline the proposed project staffing structure and management plan
for the collaborative effort including at least one full-time, high-
level, experienced lead coordinator for the initiative and support
staff for the Phase I planning and initial development process.
Applicants are to identify roles and responsibilities of each involved
agency, committee, board, or other entity and explain its relationship
to the overall effort. In addition, applicants must name and describe
the core management team and the capabilities and experience of all
staff and consultants who will participate in the management team or
play lead roles in the planning effort. Include resumes of key
personnel in appendix E (discussed below). Indicate the percentage of
time for each named staff or consultant and the supervision or
management plan. Describe the management practices that will be used to
evaluate staff and program progress and to ensure corrective action.
Section Three--Organizational Capability (15 points)
Applicants should provide a brief overview of the lead agency's
knowledge and experience in children, youth, and family issues,
particularly as they relate to the prevention and reduction of the
impact of exposure to violence. In addition, the applicant should
demonstrate specific and detailed experience in leading collaborative,
communitywide planning efforts involving systems change. The applicant
must demonstrate a history that is consistent with the size and scope
of this initiative. The applicant should also provide evidence of
experience in strategic planning and management of staff in a
collaborative environment. Experience leveraging State, local, tribal,
or other resources is required. Applicants should demonstrate the
ability and willingness to participate and cooperate in a comprehensive
evaluation of this demonstration initiative at both the national and
local level for purposes of formative learning and advancement of
strategies to assist children and families.
Budget (10 points)
Applicants must provide a proposed budget that is complete,
detailed, reasonable, allowable, and cost effective in relation to the
activities to be performed and that indicates the extent to which
resources have been committed for the first 12 months of the
initiative. Although Safe Start is intended to improve service delivery
through enhanced coordination of available services, the program allows
applicants to determine the ratio of funds for coordination and for
services, based on local needs. However, applicants must provide at
least one full-time experienced, high-level project coordinator to
oversee the planning effort and additional staff resources and support
as needed. In addition, of the up to $250,000 to be awarded for
planning, applicants must set aside $50,000 for local training and
technical assistance to support community-specific needs and build on
existing local TTA resources (to be defined in the budget). Sites are
encouraged in Phase I to use the TTA set-aside to provide support for
ongoing outside facilitation and consultation of the strategic planning
process. Applicants should also use these funds to budget for travel to
two cross-site grantee meetings. Additionally, ample funds should be
budgeted for the local evaluation according to the specifications of
this solicitation.
Appendixes (10 points)
To help reviewers gauge the likelihood of grantee success,
applicants must submit the following appendixes as evidence of their
readiness and potential:
Appendix A: Resources list. This is a listing of the
existing local services to children and families in the areas of
prevention and reduction of the impact of exposure to violence. At a
minimum, the list should include provider names, addresses, phone
numbers, and a brief description of the services offered.
Appendix B: Cross-system protocols. These are interagency
agreements and protocols outlining a multidisciplinary approach to
responding to children exposed to violence and preventing exposure,
case management and tracking, and provision of services and treatment
to these children and their families. Such agreements should, at a
minimum, be among the police department, the child welfare system, the
courts, the appropriate health and mental health agencies, and domestic
violence service providers or advocates. Where agreements are not
developed, please provide policies and protocols that exist between
these agencies for services to children and families in general that
may be expanded in Phase I. Agreements and protocols that include the
school system and victims' services and advocates will further enhance
the application. (To meet page limitations, applicants may provide a
bibliography of protocols and interagency agreements that includes
date(s) of agreement/effective date(s) and selected, relevant pages as
evidence of applicability of the documents to this effort.)
Appendix C: Statement of collaborative application. It is
imperative that the plan be a mutual submission by all stakeholders. As
evidence, applicants must submit a statement asserting that each party
signing was substantially involved in the development of the plan. The
statement must contain each person's original signature, typed/printed
name, address, telephone number, and affiliation (title and agency or
role-e.g., parent, block leader).
Appendix D: Evidence of favorable policies and/or
legislation. Applicants are to document the existence of a favorable
climate by listing current agency policies or local, State, or tribal
legislation that aids interagency, communitywide collaboration in
regard to children exposed to violence or other family support issues.
As with appendix B, applicants may choose to do this by providing a
bibliography of policies and legislation that includes effective
date(s) along with selected, relevant pages.
Appendix E: Key staff and consultant resumes. Include
resumes or brief descriptions of the relevant experience of key staff
named in the ``Management and Organizational Capability'' section.
Appendix F: Letters of agreement and MOU's. Include
documentation of letters of agreement and MOU's that specifically
describe commitments made by each partner agency.
[[Page 16566]]
Format
The narrative portion of this application must not exceed 25 pages
(excluding forms, assurances, and appendixes) and must be submitted on
8\1/2\- by 11-inch paper, double spaced on one side of the paper in a
standard 12-point font. The appendixes cannot exceed 20 pages. This is
necessary to maintain fair and uniform standards among all applicants.
If the narrative and appendixes do not conform to these standards,
OJJDP will deem the application ineligible for consideration.
Award Period
The Safe Start demonstration project will be funded in the form of
a cooperative agreement for a 5\1/2\ year project period.
Applicants are requested to apply for up to $670,000; however, only
$250,000 will be available for Phase I (the first 12 months of the
project). Applicants should provide a detailed budget and supporting
narrative only for Phase I (12 months).
The remainder of the award funds ($420,000) should be designated
for development and implementation activities. Applicants should
provide only a summary budget for the $420,000 for Phase II initial
implementation. A summary budget to be used by all applicants has been
provided as attachment A, since in the first 9 months of the planning
phase selected jurisdictions will be expected to develop a detailed 18-
month implementation budget (based on the 5-year strategic plan). The
$420,000 will be special conditioned under the grant and will not be
available for use by the grantee until the detailed 5-year strategic
plan and 18-month implementation plan are reviewed and approved by
OJJDP.
In the 18-month implementation plan, grantees will be required to
provide a detailed budget and supporting narrative for the remaining
$420,000 of funds plus up to $670,000 made available through a
supplemental award in Phase II.
Award Amount
Selected applicants will receive up to $250,000 for Phase I
planning and development. Once the planning phase has been completed
and the 5-year strategic plan and 18-month implementation plan are
approved, up to $1,090,000 will be made available, including the
balance of the $420,000 from the initial budget period. In that way,
the funding level for the project will increase in Phase II for startup
and initial implementation activities.
Funding will then decrease in Phase III, as sites seek and obtain
alternative forms of funding to continue this project. Funding in Phase
II and the subsequent years of Phase III will depend on grantee
performance, availability of funds, and other criteria established at
the time of the award.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number
For this program, the CFDA number, which is required on Standard
Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance, is 16.730. This form is
included in the FY 1999 Application Package, which can be obtained by
calling the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or sending
an e-mail request to puborder@ncjrs.org. The Application Package is
also available online at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org.
Coordination of Federal Efforts
To encourage better coordination among Federal agencies in
addressing State and local needs, DOJ is requesting applicants to
provide information on the following: (1) Active Federal grant award(s)
supporting this or related efforts, including awards from DOJ; (2) any
pending application(s) for Federal funds for this or related efforts;
and (3) plans for coordinating any funds described in items (1) or (2)
with the funding sought by this application. For each Federal award,
applicants must include the program or project title, the Federal
grantor agency, the amount of the award, and a brief description of its
purpose.
``Related efforts'' is defined for these purposes as one of the
following:
Efforts for the same purpose (i.e., the proposed award
would supplement, expand, complement, or continue activities funded
with other Federal grants).
Another phase or component of the same program or project
(e.g., to implement a planning effort funded by other Federal funds or
to provide a substance abuse treatment or education component within a
criminal justice project).
Services of some kind (e.g., technical assistance,
research, or evaluation) to the program or project described in the
application.
Delivery Instructions
All applications should be mailed or delivered to the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
c/o Juvenile Justice Resource Center, 2277 Research Boulevard, Mail
Stop 2K, Rockville, MD 20850; 301-519-5535.
Note: In the lower left-hand corner of the envelope, you must
clearly write ``Safe Start Demonstration Project'' and indicate the
type of jurisdiction for which you are applying (urban, rural, or
tribal).
Due Date
Applicants are responsible for ensuring that the original and five
copies of the application package are received by 5 p.m. EDT on June
14, 1999.
Contacts
For further information, call Michelle Avery, Program Manager, Special
Emphasis Division, at 202-307-5914, or send an e-mail inquiry to
averym@ojp.usdoj.gov.
Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse: 800-638-8736 (phone) or
www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org (Web site)
National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect: 800-394-3366 (phone)
or www.calib.com/nccanch (Web site)
References
Carlson, B.E. 1984. Children's observations of interparental
violence. In Battered Women and Their Families, edited by A.R.
Roberts. New York: Springer, pp. 147-167.
Conly, C., and McGillis, D. 1996. The Federal role in revitalizing
communities and preventing and controlling crime and violence.
National Institute of Justice Journal 231:24-30.
Fantuzzo, J.W., Boruch, R., Beriama, A., Atkins, M., and Marcus, S.
1997. Domestic violence and children: Prevalence and risk in five
major cities. Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry 36:1, 116-122.
Gerry, M., and Morrill, W. 1990. Integrating the delivery of
services to school-aged children at risk: Toward a description of
American experience and experimentation. Octopus Times 1:61-66.
Melaville, A., and Blank, M. 1993. Together We Can: A Guide for
Crafting a Profamily System of Education and Human Services.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
Poe-Yamagata, E. 1997. ``Number of Children Reported to Protected
Service Agencies, 1980-1996.'' Adapted from Sickmund, M., Snyder,
H., and Poe-Yamagata, E. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1997 Update
on Violence, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Steinmetz, S.K. 1977. The Cycle of Violence: Assertive, Aggressive,
and Abusive Family Interaction. New York: Praeger.
Straus, M.A. 1991 (September). Children as witnesses to marital
violence: A risk factor for life-long problems among nationally
representative sample of American men and women. Paper presented at
the Ross Roundtable on Children and Violence, Washington, DC.
[[Page 16567]]
Straus, M., Gelles, R., and Steinmetz, S. 1980. Behind Closed Doors:
Violence in the American Family. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
Taylor, L., Zuckerman, B., Harik, V., and Groves, B.M. 1994.
Witnessing violence by young children and their mothers. Journal of
Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 15(2):120-123.
Thornberry, T.P. 1994. Violent Families and Youth Violence.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1995) A Nation's
Shame: Fatal Child Abuse and Neglect in the United States, A Report
of the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect.
Widom, C.S. 1992. Cycle of Violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of
Justice.
Wright, K.N., and Wright, K.E. 1994. Family Life, Delinquency, and
Crime: A Policymaker's Guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Zero to Three/National Center for Clinical Infant Programs. 1994.
Caring for Infants and Toddlers in Violent Environments: Hurt,
Healing, and Hope. Washington, DC: Zero to Three.
Attachment A--Summary Budget for $420,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personnel and fringe benefits.............................. $150,000
Program services........................................... 200,000
Training and technical assistance.......................... 25,000
Local evaluation........................................... 25,000
Equipment.................................................. 10,000
Travel..................................................... 5,000
Supplies................................................... 5,000
------------
Total.................................................. 420,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of the Safe Start Initiative
Purpose
The purpose of this evaluation is to document and evaluate
communities' efforts to prevent and reduce the impact of family and
community violence on young children (primarily from birth to 6 years
of age). Toward that end, the Safe Start initiative seeks to create a
comprehensive service delivery system by helping communities to expand
existing partnerships among service providers in the fields of early
childhood education/development, health, mental health, family support
and strengthening, domestic violence, substance abuse prevention and
treatment, crisis intervention, child welfare, law enforcement, courts,
and legal services.
Background
The goal of the Safe Start initiative is to create a holistic
approach to reduce and prevent the harmful effects of exposure to
violence on young children by improving access to, delivery of, and
quality of services to children and responding to the needs of children
and their families at any point of entry into relevant systems (e.g.,
legal, social services, medical). Safe Start communities will undertake
the following activities to achieve this goal:
Expand a comprehensive planning effort that includes
representatives from a variety of public and private agencies and
programs with expertise in child development, violence, and the impact
of violence on children.
Assess the extent and nature of children's exposure or
risk of exposure to violence and the circumstances within the community
under which this exposure occurs.
Assess and address the current levels and seriousness of
critical health, mental health, and educational consequences and needs
of children exposed to violence.
Increase awareness within communities and among
professionals of the impact of exposure to violence on children.
Identify and reduce gaps, deficiencies, and barriers in
community policies, procedures, and services designed to prevent
exposure to violence or lessen its impact on children who have been
exposed.
Improve identification, referral, and interventions for
children who are at risk of being exposed to violence or have been
exposed to violence.
Identify and access training and technical assistance that
supports coordinated services, policies, and procedures designed to
prevent exposure to violence or lessen its impact on children who have
been exposed.
Facilitate collaboration and coordination of services to
improve cross-agency response, increase professional cross-training,
and reduce barriers to accessing services.
Foster and facilitate organizational and systems change
that promotes improvements in the availability, delivery, and quality
of prevention, protection/intervention, and treatment services provided
by law enforcement, mental health, health, domestic violence advocacy,
courts and legal services, and educational services.
Develop and implement specific protocols, procedures, and
research-based programs for responding to the needs of children exposed
to violence and strengthening violence prevention programs designed to
reduce such exposure.
Provide specific training and support to service providers
in dealing with the psychological and developmental effects of
children's experience with violence.
Address the multiethnic, racial, and gender needs of young
children who are at high risk of or who have been exposed to violence.
This community-based initiative will progress in a series
of stages across 5\1/2\ years of Federal funding. Applicants should
become familiar with the program announcement for OJJDP's Safe Start
demonstration project and research literature on the prevention and
effects of exposure to violence. Applicants should pay special
attention to the core elements of the Safe Start initiative as
identified in the program solicitation. These highlight the
programmatic areas, such as courts, police, child protective services,
and mental health services, that must be addressed by each community.
Also, in the program solicitation, the ``Program Strategy'' section
delineates the activities and goals of the initiative's phases.
Evaluation Strategy
OJJDP will competitively award one cooperative agreement under this
solicitation. Given the purpose of the evaluation, the overall
evaluation design is intended to carefully document the formative
aspects of the initiative and measure its effects in terms of level of
implementation of the strategic planning process, extent of systems
reform and service integration and improvement, and impact of the
initiative on the lives of children and families.
Indicators of the level of implementation of the strategic planning
process include, but are not limited to, determining:
The comprehensiveness and rigor in assessing the incidence
and prevalence of children's exposure to violence and the nature and
severity of harm caused to children in the community who have been
exposed to violence; The closeness of the connection between the
implementation plan and the risks, needs, and resources of the
community.
The extent to which proposed solutions reflect both
theoretical and strategic relevance to the problems identified in the
assessment.
Systems reform and service integration and improvement might
include measures of the following:
Greater use of existing data sources or the creation of
new data systems to
[[Page 16568]]
identify trends in the incidence of child victimization and exposure to
violence.
Number of referrals made to mental health services by law
enforcement, social services, early childhood workers, domestic
violence shelters, and other relevant agencies.
Number of court cases that result in referrals of children
for screening, assessment, or intervention and treatment because of a
recognition of exposure to violence issues.
Changes in resource allocation (e.g., funding streams).
Improved or new methods for sharing information across
agencies.
Impacts on the lives of children and families can include a variety
of outcomes that will vary according to the strategies implemented by
each community. Some examples include:
As a result of providing more timely and appropriate
mental health services to children exposed to violence via police
referral mechanisms and partnerships, these children may exhibit lower
levels of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and/or depression.
A Prenatal Nurse Home Visitation Program may result in
healthier mothers and babies, increased attachment and bonding, and
reduced incidence of child abuse and neglect.
The evaluation of Safe Start will be conducted using a national
evaluator and local evaluators funded by and located in each Safe Start
community. The relationship between the national evaluator and the
local evaluators should be collaborative and supportive with guidance
and leadership coming from the national evaluator. In key areas of the
evaluation effort, the national evaluator and OJJDP have authority over
local evaluators. Specifically, local evaluators must participate in
the cross-site process and impact evaluations in accordance with the
procedures established by the national evaluator (e.g., the collection
and transmittal of data) and design a local evaluation plan that is
approved by the national evaluator and OJJDP. Applicants should pay
special attention to the portion of the program solicitation that
outlines the community's responsibility for selecting and funding a
local evaluator and the role of local evaluators in the overall
evaluation effort.
The national evaluator will be expected to (1) carefully document
all stages of the planning and implementation processes and collect
relevant process data; (2) design a cross-site impact evaluation and
collect and analyze relevant data; (3) assist local evaluators to
develop local logic models and impact evaluation plans; (4) compile and
provide timely comparative cross-site results, as appropriate, back to
the local sites and their evaluators from the impact evaluation; (5)
assist local evaluators in determining which programmatic components
are amenable to producing reliable measures of program impact on
children; and (6) prepare reports suitable for publication by OJJDP.
The evaluation effort will be guided by a logic model of the Safe Start
initiative that can be tailored to the activities of each individual
site and follow the theory of change proposed by each community. The
evaluation must be planned to include up to 12 Safe Start communities.
Cross-Site Process Evaluation
The national evaluator is responsible for designing a cross-site
process evaluation, which will be adopted by all Safe Start local
evaluators. Local evaluators will have input into this design but
ultimately will be required to participate in the cross-site process
evaluation in accordance with the agreed-upon structure and methods.
Local evaluators will be required to submit process data to the
national evaluator on an agreed-upon schedule to be developed by the
national evaluator.
The process evaluation should be designed to document and analyze
the process of effective implementation of the Safe Start initiative to
provide information to strengthen and refine the initiative within and
across sites throughout the 5\1/2\ years of planning and
implementation. It is important to identify factors that contribute to
or impede the successful implementation of the initiative in each
community. It is essential to know not only whether the initiative is
successful or unsuccessful and the degree to which it succeeds or
fails, but also why or how it was successful or unsuccessful. The
process evaluation also should document the breadth of the community
assessment process, analyze the connectedness between the results of
the community assessment and implementation plan, and analyze the
extent to which each community's implementation plan draws from
programs and practices that are theory driven and research based.
Cross-Site Impact Evaluation
The national evaluator is responsible for designing the cross-site
impact evaluation. Local evaluators must participate in the design and
implementation of the cross-site impact evaluation in accordance with
procedures developed by the national evaluator. This component of the
evaluation will assess the extent to which the initiative is meeting
its quantitative goals and the amount of change that is taking place on
the community and individual level. For example, if the Safe Start
community adopts new policies for police referrals to family counseling
services, the national evaluator may require that the local evaluator
and other local Safe Start project staff monitor the number of
referrals made after the policy takes effect. In this same vein, the
national evaluator may require that archival data be collected to
provide a baseline. Also, the national evaluator will report on the
effects specific programs and strategies are having on children and
families. This level of data collection and analysis will be possible
primarily through the design and implementation of the local impact
evaluation, described in more detail below.
The national and local evaluator must develop a strong working
relationship and a mutual commitment to measure Safe Start outcomes.
The local evaluator will work with the national evaluator to identify
outcomes that can be measured as the initiative develops. It should be
noted that all of these requirements will be central to implementing a
rigorous evaluation of Safe Start and embed the process and impact
evaluation process in the program development, implementation, and
refinement process.
Local Impact Evaluations
As Safe Start communities begin to implement specific programs
(e.g., Nurse Home Visitation) and the need arises to assess the impact
of Safe Start services on individuals (i.e., children and their
families/caregivers), the national evaluator will provide technical
assistance to local evaluators in designing evaluation plans that can
accomplish this task. The local evaluator and local Safe Start project
staff will be expected to make a strong and demonstrated commitment to
designing evaluations that can accomplish this level of assessment.
Furthermore, these local plans must focus on conducting rigorous
evaluations that use experimental or quasi-experimental designs. The
national evaluator will provide guidance in developing these plans and
report on the progress of each community to OJJDP. The local evaluator
will submit an evaluation plan to the national evaluator, who will then
submit the plan to OJJDP, which will give final approval for all local
impact evaluation plans.
Local impact evaluation plans will be developed in a cooperative
effort between the Safe Start project staff, its
[[Page 16569]]
local evaluator, and the national evaluator. This collaboration is
important to the evaluation effort for a number of reasons. For
example, when local impact evaluations are designed, the Safe Start
project staff must have input into how to identify or create comparison
groups, how to design referral procedures for a specific program, and
how to develop agreements regarding random assignment to experimental
and control groups. In sum, the local Safe Start project staff are
crucial to the implementation of any rigorous evaluation design. The
national evaluator is responsible for guiding the development of these
plans through training and technical assistance on evaluation methods.
(The level of expertise and technical assistance needed at the local
level is expected to vary across communities.) Finally, the national
evaluator will be required to develop a Safe Start Self-Evaluation Tool
Kit for use by each site. The Tool Kit should be modeled after OJJDP's
Title V: Community Prevention Grants Program: Community Self-Evaluation
Workbook (available from the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse, 800-638-
8736).
The national evaluation of Safe Start will be conducted in two
phases over 6 years. Phase I (12 months) will entail designing and
implementing a cross-site process evaluation; building capacity at the
local level to conduct more intensive impact evaluations of specific
programs and strategies (e.g., developing tools for communities to use
in selecting a local evaluator and providing technical assistance
around evaluation issues); assisting in the development of Safe Start
logic models and local evaluation plans; developing the Safe Start
Evaluation Tool Kit; developing a preliminary workplan for measuring
the impact of Safe Start across sites; and producing reports and
publications.
During Phase II (60 months), the national evaluator will continue
and complete the cross-site process evaluation, conduct the cross-site
impact evaluation, produce and provide ongoing assistance to local
evaluators in designing and conducting more rigorous impact evaluations
of specific programs and strategies, and produce reports and
publications.
Goals and Objectives
Phase I
Goal: Document and analyze the process of effective implementation
of the Safe Start initiative to provide information to strengthen and
refine the initiative within and across sites. The analysis will
identify factors that contribute to or impede the successful
implementation of the initiative in each community.
Objectives:
Develop a conceptual framework for conducting the cross-
site process evaluation to include all Safe Start sites. This framework
should be formed around a general logic model of the Safe Start
initiative that can be tailored to the activities of each site. The
national evaluator must develop materials communicating the evaluation
strategy, including instruments, mechanisms, and procedures to collect
process data, to the local evaluators and Safe Start project staff.
Compile and analyze results and provide routine feedback
to the sites on the planning, program development, and implementation
process.
Produce reports and publications that document the
progress of the initiative in each community and across sites.
Goal: Develop the capacity of local evaluators to evaluate the
impact of specific programs and strategies implemented in their
communities.
Objectives:
Formulate a set of critical elements related to the tasks
and requirements of the local evaluator to be used by Safe Start
communities in selecting/recruiting a local evaluator 3 months after
the grant award. This product should explain the role and
responsibilities of the national evaluator as they relate to (1) the
goals of the national evaluation effort (e.g., data collection
requirements) and (2) the goals of the local evaluation effort (e.g.,
experimental or quasi-experimental evaluations of specific programs).
Also at this time, the grantee will submit a preliminary plan for
assisting Safe Start communities in the selection process.
Provide training and technical assistance (the degree of
which should be flexible to address the needs of different communities)
to local evaluators in refining logic models; identifying long-,
intermediate-, and short-range outcomes; identifying necessary data
sources and variables; and designing local impact evaluation plans for
evaluating the impact of specific programs and strategies implemented
by the community. The national evaluator will produce a Safe Start
Self-Evaluation Tool Kit modeled after OJJDP's Title V: Community
Prevention Grants Program: Community Self-Evaluation Workbook.
Goal: Design an impact evaluation that can measure the effect of
the initiative within and across sites. It is expected that communities
will differ significantly in their approaches to the initiative as they
will be guided by their specific risk and resource assessments.
However, the national evaluator should draw from its experience with
evaluating similar efforts and associated literature on evaluating
community initiatives to propose an approach to designing a cross-site
impact evaluation.
Phase II
Goal: Continue the cross-site process evaluation and finalize and
implement the cross-site impact evaluation design. During Phase II,
particular attention will be paid to identifying, collecting, and
reporting on community-, system-, and individual-level outcomes.
Objectives:
Compile and analyze results and provide routine feedback
to the sites on the planning, program development, and implementation
process.
Produce annual, interim reports that document the progress
of the initiative in each community and across sites.
Goal: Further assist local evaluators in designing and implementing
local evaluation plans and monitor the progress and results of these
evaluations.
Objectives:
Provide technical assistance to local evaluators as
necessary.
Collect and analyze Safe Start local impact evaluation
plans and results and produce a report for OJJDP.
Products
For Delivery During Phase I
The grantee will submit a draft cross-site process evaluation
design including a common set of data collection instruments,
mechanisms, and procedures to be pilot tested at Safe Start sites. This
product will be submitted 3 months after the grant award.
The grantee will submit the set of critical elements related to the
tasks and requirements of the local evaluator to be used by Safe Start
communities in selecting/recruiting a local evaluator 3 months after
the grant award. Also at this time, the grantee will submit a
preliminary plan for assisting Safe Start communities in the selection
process.
Six months after the grant award, the grantee will deliver a draft
Safe Start Self-Evaluation Tool Kit modeled after OJJDP's Title V:
Community Prevention Grants Program: Community Self-Evaluation
Workbook. Also at this time, the grantee will deliver a technical
assistance workplan for assisting Safe
[[Page 16570]]
Start communities in the development of local evaluation plans.
An interim report describing the results of the process evaluation
through the end of Phase I will be submitted 30 days prior to the end
of Phase I. This report should include analysis and results of the
planning process, a summary of logic model development in each Safe
Start community, and a summary of each local evaluator's progress
toward designing a local evaluation plan. This report should lend
itself to publication as one or more OJJDP Bulletins.
A preliminary workplan for developing and conducting the cross-site
impact evaluation will be submitted 30 days prior to the end of Phase I
(a separate document from the cross-site interim report). This should
include potential data sources and data collection strategies and an
estimated timetable.
For Delivery During Phase II
A finalized cross-site impact evaluation design and strategy will
be submitted 3 months after Phase II begins. The grantee must address
issues relating to pilot testing instruments and Office of Management
and Budget approval.
During Phase II, interim reports that describe the ongoing efforts
of the Safe Start communities (e.g., local development and evaluation
of the initiative) and present findings from the cross-site process and
impact evaluations will be submitted every 6 months (the first being
due 6 months after Phase II begins). These reports should lend
themselves to being published as one or more OJJDP publications.
A draft final report will be due 30 days prior to the end of Year
6. This report should incorporate results of both the process and
cross-site impact evaluations and update and summarize local
evaluators' progress toward completing local impact evaluations. The
final report will be due at the end of Year 6 and should lend itself to
being published as one or more OJJDP publications.
Eligibility Requirements
OJJDP invites applications from public and private agencies,
organizations, institutions, or individuals. Applicants must
demonstrate that they have experience in evaluating broad-based
community initiatives. Private, for-profit organizations must agree to
waive any profit or fee. Joint applications from two or more eligible
applicants are welcome, as long as one is designated the primary
applicant and any others coapplicants.
Selection Criteria
Applicants will be evaluated and rated by a peer review panel
according to the selection criteria outlined below.
Problem(s) To Be Addressed (20 points)
The applicant must include a clear and concise discussion of its
understanding of the effects, treatment, and prevention of young
children's exposure to violence. Applicants should discuss how to apply
state-of-the-art evaluation methods, including qualitative methods, to
achieve evaluation objectives. Also, applicants should discuss any
anticipated methodological issues and problems associated with this
type of evaluation and describe proposed solutions for these potential
problems. A thorough understanding of theory-driven evaluation,
interagency collaboration to effectuate systems change and service
delivery improvement, community-based prevention and intervention
programs, and multisite research on a national level is vital.
Goals and Objectives (10 points)
Applicants must define specific and measurable goals and objectives
for coordinating and implementing this project. These should be guided
the requirements in this solicitation, but the applicant should expand
and augment them to fit with its approach to the project while
describing how the approach will accomplish the larger goals and
objectives.
Project Design (35 points)
In response to this solicitation, applicants must present a
detailed and clear design for accomplishing the goals and objectives of
Phase I. Applicants must discuss how their proposed approach to Phase I
would lay the foundation for meeting the goals and objectives of Phase
II. The applicant must include a timetable for accomplishing Phase I
goals and objectives and delivering the required products. It is
important to discuss how the cross-site process evaluation will be
carried out and how the applicant will lay the foundation for the
cross-site impact evaluation to include, but not be limited to,
instrument development, methods, information dissemination, and cross-
site communication and monitoring. Applicants must ensure the
confidentiality of all subjects. It is important to discuss how the
applicant will effectively deliver technical assistance at the local
level aimed at evaluation capacity building. Furthermore, the applicant
must propose a design that will foster a collaborative and supportive
relationship between local evaluators and the national evaluator.
Management and Organizational Capability (25 points)
The application must include a discussion of how the applicant will
coordinate and manage this evaluation to achieve evaluation goals and
objectives. The applicant's management structure and staffing must be
adequate and appropriate for the successful implementation of the
project. The applicant must identify responsible individuals and key
consultants, their time commitment, and major tasks. Key staff and
consultants should have significant experience with evaluation research
on multisite, community initiatives. They must demonstrate the ability
to work effectively with a range of agencies and service providers
including, but not limited to, courts, police departments, child
protective services, and mental health service providers to collect
data and manage other requirements of the project. Staff and key
consultant resumes must be attached as part of the appendixes.
Budget (10 points)
The applicant must provide a proposed budget that is complete,
detailed, reasonable, allowable, and cost effective in relation to the
activities to be undertaken during Phase I. (Annual Phase II budgets
will vary depending on certain factors; see below.) Applicants must
budget for travel to two cross-site grantee meetings in Phase I in
addition to any other travel.
Format
The narrative portion of this application must be submitted on 8\1/
2\-by 11-inch paper, double spaced on one side of the paper in a
standard 12-point font. This is necessary to maintain fair and uniform
standards among all applicants. If the narrative does not conform to
these standards, OJJDP will deem the application ineligible for
consideration. The narrative must not exceed 35 pages exclusive of
appendixes, forms, assurances, and budget.
Award Period
This evaluation will be funded in the form of a cooperative
agreement for an initial 12-month budget period for Phase I of a 6\1/
2\-year project period. Funding in the second and subsequent budget
periods will depend upon grantee performance, availability of funds,
and
[[Page 16571]]
other criteria established at the time of award.
Award Amount
Up to $1 million is available for the initial 12-month budget
period. Funding in subsequent years will be available at levels that
are at least comparable.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number
For this program, the CFDA number, which is required on Standard
Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance, is 16.730. This form is
included in the FY 1999 Application Package, which can be obtained by
calling the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or sending
an e-mail request to puborder@ncjrs.org. The Application Package is
also available online at www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org.
Coordination of Federal Efforts
To encourage better coordination among Federal agencies in
addressing State and local needs, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
is requesting applicants to provide information on the following: (1)
Active Federal grant award(s) supporting this or related efforts,
including awards from DOJ; (2) any pending application(s) for Federal
funds for this or related efforts; and (3) plans for coordinating any
funds described in items (1) or (2) with the funding sought by this
application. For each Federal award, applicants must include the
program or project title, the Federal grantor agency, the amount of the
award, and a brief description of its purpose.
``Related efforts'' is defined for these purposes as one of the
following:
Efforts for the same purpose (i.e., the proposed award
would supplement, expand, complement, or continue activities funded
with other Federal grants).
Another phase or component of the same program or project
(e.g., to implement a planning effort funded by other Federal funds or
to provide a substance abuse treatment or education component within a
criminal justice project).
Services of some kind (e.g., technical assistance,
research, or evaluation) to the program or project described in the
application.
Delivery Instructions
All application packages should be mailed or delivered to the
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, c/o Juvenile
Justice Resource Center, 2277 Research Boulevard, Mail Stop 2K,
Rockville, MD 20850; 301-519-5535.
Note: In the lower left-hand corner of the envelope, you must
clearly write ``Evaluation of the Safe Start Initiative.''
Due Date
Applicants are responsible for ensuring that the original and five
copies of the application package are received by 5 p.m. EDT on June
14, 1999.
Contact
For further information, call Dean Hoffman, Program Manager,
Research and Program Development Division, 202-353-9256, or send an e-
mail inquiry to hoffmand@ojp.usdoj.gov.
Suggested References
The Annie E. Casey Foundation. 1997. Evaluating Comprehensive
Community Change. Report of The Annie E. Casey Foundation's March
1997 Research and Evaluation Conference.
Connell, J.P., Kubisch, A.C., Schorr, L.B., and Weiss, C.H., eds.
1995. New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts,
Methods, and Contexts. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
Fulbright-Anderson, K., Kubisch, A.C., and Connell, J.P., eds. 1998.
New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives (Volume 2):
Theory, Measurement, and Analysis. Washington, DC: The Aspen
Institute.
Harrell, Adele. 1996. Evaluation Strategies for Human Services
Programs: A Guide for Policymakers and Providers. Washington, DC:
The Urban Institute Press.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1995. Title V
Delinquency Prevention Program: Community Self-Evaluation Workbook.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Dated: March 26, 1999.
Shay Bilchik,
Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
[FR Doc. 99-8158 Filed 4-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
