[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25049-25054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11963]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Secretary
Supporting Field Initiated Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evaluation
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation;
DHHS.
ACTION: Announcement of the availability of funds and request for
applications to enhance existing evaluations on teen pregnancy
prevention programs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation (ASPE) announces that applications are being accepted for
funding to augment existing evaluations of teen pregnancy prevention
interventions that are rigorous in design and already have funding. The
primary goal of the proposed grants is to further the understanding of
teen pregnancy prevention interventions and the extent to which these
interventions meet their goal of reducing teenage pregnancies. Federal
funding under this announcement is intended to support evaluation
exclusively, not program operation or service provision. Projects
funded under this announcement are
[[Page 25050]]
intended to complement other aspects of the Department's National
Strategy to Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
Organizations eligible to apply for this federal funding include
public entities; private for profit organizations (if fee is waived);
and public or private nonprofit organizations, including universities
that are either in the process of conducting a rigorous evaluation of a
teen pregnancy prevention program or that have completed an evaluation
of such program within the past three years and would be appropriate
for a follow-up.
It is anticipated that two to three grants totaling approximately
$300,000 will be awarded. Project duration is 12 months from date of
award.
Legislative Authority
This grant is authorized by section 1110 of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C).
CLOSING DATE: The closing date for submitting applications under this
announcement is July 6, 1998.
MAILING ADDRESS: Application instructions and forms should be requested
from and submitted to: Grants Officer, Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human
Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey
Building, Washington, DC 20201, Phone (202) 690-8794. Copies of this
program announcement and many of the required forms may also be
obtained electronically at the ASPE World Wide Web Page http://
aspe.os.dhhs.gov. You may fax your request to (202) 690-6518 to the
attention of the Grants Officer. Application submissions may not be
faxed or sent electronically.
The printed Federal Register notice is the only official program
announcement. Although reasonable efforts are taken to assure that the
files on the ASPE World Wide Web Page containing electronic copies of
this Program Announcement are accurate and complete, they are provided
for information only. The applicant bears sole responsibility to assure
that the copy downloaded and/or printed from any other source is
accurate and complete. Requests for forms and questions (administrative
and technical) will be accepted and responded to up to 30 days prior to
closing date of receipt of applications.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Technical questions should be directed to
Barbara Broman DHHS, ASPE, Telephone, (202) 690-6461 or E-Mail,
bbroman@osaspe.dhhs.gov. Questions may also be faxed to (202) 690-5514.
Written technical questions should be addressed to Ms. Broman at the
following address: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence
Ave, SW, Room 450G, Washington, DC 20201.
Part I. Background
Although teen birth rates in the United States are declining, the
teen birth rate continues to range between two and seven times higher
than the teen birth rate in comparable Western industrialized nations.
However, before large scale pregnancy prevention initiatives can be
implemented, the current knowledge base on pregnancy prevention
programs must be expanded to delineate which strategies are the most
promising, which aspects of which programs demonstrate the strongest
impact, and which programs are successful in affecting behavior across
various communities and population characteristics, such as ethnicity
and socioeconomic status. This project is designed to augment existing
rigorous evaluations of teen pregnancy prevention interventions to
further the understanding of the extent to which these interventions
meet their goal of reducing teenage pregnancy.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-193) signed by President Clinton on August 22,
1996 called for additional efforts to prevent teenage pregnancies and
to assure that communities engage in local efforts to prevent teen
pregnancy. DHHS responded to this call from Congress and the President
by releasing the National Strategy to Prevent Teen Pregnancy in January
1997. The National Strategy builds on existing public and private-
sector efforts and on initiatives in the new welfare law by helping
provide the tools needed to develop more strategic and targeted
approaches to preventing teen pregnancies. The goals of the Strategy
include: Strengthening ongoing efforts across the nation through
increasing opportunities through welfare reform; supporting promising
approaches; building partnerships; improving data collection, research,
and evaluation; and disseminating information on innovative and
effective practices.
The Department supports a variety of programs to help communities
develop teen pregnancy prevention strategies. However, since the
multiple challenges adolescents face are often interrelated, programs
that emphasize other high-risk behaviors (e.g., alcohol and drug abuse,
school dropout) are also related to teen pregnancy prevention. Current
Department efforts include family planning grants, maternal and child
health programs, abstinence education, adolescent health programs,
runaway and homeless youth programs, and alcohol and drug abuse
prevention programs.
Department research, evaluation, and data activities in this area
are extensive. Agencies involved include the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention/National Center Health Statistics (NCHS),
National Institutes of Health /National Institute of Child Health and
Human Development (NICHD), and ASPE. Specifically, in 1995, ASPE funded
Child Trends, Inc. to do a comprehensive review of the most recent
literature on teen sexual behavior, pregnancy, and parenthood and the
effectiveness of teen pregnancy prevention programs (Beginning Too
Soon: Adolescent Sexual Behavior, Pregnancy and Parenthood). ASPE,
along with NICHD and NCHS, also prepared the September 1995 Report to
Congress on Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing requested by Senator Moynihan.
The report includes the current status and trends in nonmarital
childbearing and presents a series of supplemental papers from experts
from various social science disciplines. DHHS' statistical and
surveillance activities provide much needed data that support research
throughout the country. However, there is still a great need to know
more about which programs focused on preventing teen pregnancy change
sexual behavior and what makes them achieve their program goals.
Numerous programs have been implemented, ranging from abstinence
education to comprehensive, multi-faceted interventions that offer
education, counseling, and a variety of support services. As documented
in the Child Trends report referenced above, several broad conclusions
can be drawn about the current state of the field of pregnancy
prevention programs. First, interventions have generally not been
informed by basic research studies or by theory, and this accounts for
the incomplete state of the current knowledge regarding the success of
interventions intended to affect adolescent sexual behavior and
pregnancy. Second, most of the evaluations that have been conducted
have been lacking in methodological and statistical rigor. Douglas
Kirby's 1997 report No Easy Answers, prepared for the National Campaign
to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, also concludes there is a need to continue
to explore, develop and rigorously evaluate promising
[[Page 25051]]
approaches. This announcement looks to build on current evaluation
studies, such as those included in the reports noted above, that are
based on theory and existing research, using rigorous methods.
Part II--Purpose and Project Design
A. Purpose
The primary purpose of this announcement is to enhance existing
teen pregnancy prevention program evaluations. As part of the DHHS'
National Strategy to Prevent Teen Pregnancy we strive to better
understand the effects of these programs by providing additional
support to evaluations already in place. We are primarily interested in
supporting enhancements to existing evaluations (e.g., follow-up to
completed studies or nearly completed studies or enhanced data
analysis). We do not expect to provide full funding for any study.
B. Project Design
Funding under this announcement is expected to be used to support
existing rigorous evaluations of teen pregnancy prevention
interventions. Given that we know there is no ``magic bullet'' in
preventing teen pregnancy, ASPE does not prescribe specific types of
interventions for evaluation, but rather invites varied approaches to
advance understanding of teen pregnancy prevention efforts. While the
methods for evaluations may differ, projects must be well designed and
the methods must be adequate and appropriate to address the questions
identified.
As discussed below in the Evaluation Criteria section, applicants
must demonstrate prior experience in conducting evaluations of the
scope, scale and topic area proposed. In making funding decisions, ASPE
will consider an applicant organization's experience and the
qualifications of researchers and staff.
There is a wide range of teen pregnancy prevention programs aimed
at delaying the initiation of sexual activity, improving contraceptive
use among sexually active adolescents, and preventing subsequent births
among adolescent parents. Programs targeting each of these issues range
from traditional sex education programs and interventions designed to
improve an adolescent's decisionmaking and interpersonal skills, to
contraceptive services programs designed to meet needs of young
clients, to multi-faceted initiatives targeting a wide range of
adolescent needs. Regardless of the type of approach, ASPE is
interested in two main questions: First, have the targeted behaviors
changed during the time period under study for the population targeted?
Second, are there other possible causes for the behavior changes, if
any are noted?
ASPE also seeks evidence as to which aspects of which programs
demonstrate the strongest impact, and which programs are successful in
affecting behavior across various populations that are diverse with
respect to ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
As indicated above, we expect to provide funding to augment
existing evaluations which already examine a specific type of teen
pregnancy prevention intervention. However, ASPE does not intend to
fund evaluations of abstinence-only programs under this announcement,
given that a competitive contract award will be made to conduct an
intensive rigorous evaluation of a selected number of abstinence-only
programs funded under Section 510 of the Maternal and Child Health
Block Grant. We are seeking to enhance evaluations of other programs
including for example: curriculum-based sex education, school-based
health centers, multi-component or youth development programs. These
approaches are meant for illustrative purposes and to demonstrate our
desire for additional evaluation information on a wide variety of teen
pregnancy interventions.
Grantees must deliver a final report to ASPE at the completion of
the project that can be disseminated by ASPE or its designee(s). The
report must be reviewed for quality of content, formatting, and
readability. The report, at a minimum, should contain a table of
contents, executive summary, and full report.
In addition to the printed copies required under this grant, the
contents of all reports must be delivered in a digital form that is
reproducible on personal computers and office printers.
Electronic copy shall be delivered on 3\1/2\'' disks formatted in
the DOS (FAT) format.
Text shall be entered and formatted in any of the commonly
available commercial word processing programs marketed by the
IBM, Corel, or Microsoft
Corporations. Lengthy documents should be organized into chapters and a
separate file should be provided for each chapter. The title page,
table of contents, and other front matter shall be in a separate file.
Tables of data shall be delivered in a commonly available
commercial spreadsheet program marketed by the IBM,
Corel, or Microsoft Corporations. Each table
shall be delivered as a separate file on the disk and not embedded in
the word processing file even though tables may have been merged with
the text to form a single file for printing purposes. File names should
contain consecutive numbers that correspond to the numerical labels
used in the printed version. For example, Chapter 4, Table 7 could be
designated C4T7.tbl.
Graphic figures such as bar and line charts, diagrams, and other
drawings shall be delivered in the Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) or
the JPG (Joint Photographic Experts Group) format. Even though the
graphical elements may have been merged with the text to form a single
file for printing purposes, each graphical image shall be delivered as
a separate file on the disk and must not be embedded in a word
processing, spreadsheet, slide show or other composite file.
Documents that have been designed to include visually complex
elements, two or more colors, specialized drawings, photographic
images, or other artwork, or which have been specially prepared for
offset printing, shall be delivered in electronic form as one or more
Postscript files. All the files necessary for reproduction
shall be provided including templates, indices, etc.
C. Eligible Applicants and Funding
ASPE anticipates providing up to a total of $300,000 for two to
three approved projects in FY 98, subject to the availability of funds.
All grants will be awarded by September 30, 1998. We expect to make
one-time awards for projects. There are currently no budgeted future
year costs to this initiative, though if funding becomes available in
FY 1998 or FY 1999 additional grants could be funded or some of this
year's grants could be extended to allow additional analysis.
Applications may be submitted by for-profit and non-profit
organizations, public and private, such as universities, colleges,
hospitals, laboratories, units of State and local governments, health
boards, public health departments, volunteer organizations or clinics
that are either in the process of conducting an evaluation of a teen
pregnancy prevention intervention or that have completed an evaluation
of such program within the past three years and would be appropriate
for follow-up. However, to reach scientifically valid conclusions about
effectiveness, evaluations most appropriate for this funding should
include the following criteria: (1) A sufficiently large sample size,
(2) long-term follow-up, (3) measures of behavior rather than just
attitudes and beliefs, (4) a comparison or control group (5) proper
statistical
[[Page 25052]]
analyses, and 6) independent evaluators. Applicant should explain
further in narrative if any of these criteria are not met.
ASPE does not expect to fully fund a new evaluation. To maximize
the benefit of the Federal investment to advance knowledge about teen
pregnancy prevention, applicants must provide evidence of other sources
of funding for the project (e.g, applicant resources or private
foundation funding). The applicant should provide budget statements
from previous awards that contribute to the completion of the
evaluation. The applicant should describe the level, sources and
duration of non-Federal funds or resources committed to the project,
and should clearly state how ASPE funds will be used to enhance the
evaluation.
Part III. Application Preparation and Evaluation Criteria
This section contains information on the preparation of
applications for submission under this announcement, on the forms
necessary for submission, and on the evaluation criteria under which
the applications will be reviewed. Potential applicants should read
this section carefully in conjunction with information provided above.
The application must contain the required federal forms, title page,
table of contents, and the sections listed below. All pages of the
narrative should be numbered. The application should include the
following elements:
1. Abstract: A one page summary of the proposed project.
2. Goals and objectives of the project: An overview that describes
(1) specific research questions to be investigated, (2) the project and
methods to be employed, and (3) knowledge and information to be gained
from the project by the applicant, the government, and the research
community.
3. Methodology and Design: Provide a description and justification
of how the proposed evaluation enhancement will be implemented,
including methodologies, chosen approach, data, and proposed evaluation
and analytic plans including a description of the overall project and
how the enhancement relates to the overall project. Address the ability
to generalize the findings from this study to the national problem.
Identify theoretical or empirical basis for the methodology and
approach proposed. Specify how the study will protect the
confidentiality of subjects and the information they provide. Describe
how the project will address potential difficulties in studying the
youth population such as recruitment and retention as well as language
and cultural differences, if applicable. Indicate the types of
assurances that are provided regarding protection of human subjects, in
areas like confidentiality, informed consent, etc.
4. Experience, capacity, qualifications, and use of staff: Briefly
describe the applicant's organizational capabilities and experience in
conducting pertinent evaluation projects. Identify key staff who are
expected to carry out the proposed evaluation enhancement and provide a
curriculum vita for each person. Provide a discussion of which key
staff are already involved in the existing evaluation project and a
detailed description of additional responsibilities of that staff for
the enhancement or additional staff, if applicable. If the applicant
plans to contract for outside staff for this project, the relationship
and commitment of these people to the applicant organization should be
demonstrated. Applicants should demonstrate access to computer hardware
and software for storing and analyzing their data necessary to complete
this project.
5. Work plan: A work plan should be included which describes the
start and end dates of the overall project and the proposed
enhancement, the responsibilities of each of the key staff, and a time
line which indicates the sequence of tasks necessary for the completion
of the overall evaluation and the proposed enhancement. It should
identify other time commitments of key staff members such as other
projects and/or teaching or managerial responsibilities. The work plan
should include a discussion of plans for dissemination of the results
of the study including the findings from the enhancement, e.g.,
articles in journals and presentations at conferences.
6. Budget: Applicants must submit a request for federal funds using
Standard Form 424A and include a detailed breakdown of Federal line
items. A narrative explanation of the budget should be included which
explains fund usage in more detail. The applicant should clearly state
how the funds associated with this announcement will be used and
describe how these funds will be used for purposes that would not
otherwise be incorporated within the project. The applicant should
document equipment purchase, if applicable. The applicant should also
document the level of funding from other sources and how these funds
have been or will be utilized. The applicant should provide budget
statements from previous
award/s that contribute to the completion of the evaluation.
Review Process and Funding Information
A independent review panel will review and score all applications
that are submitted by the deadline date and which meet the screening
criteria (all information and documents as required by this
Announcement.) The panel will review the application using the
evaluation criteria listed below to score each application. These
review results will be the primary element used by the Assistant
Secretary in making funding decisions. The Department reserves the
option to discuss applications with other Federal or State staff,
specialists, experts and the general public. Comments from these
sources, along with those of the reviewers, will be kept from
inappropriate disclosure and may be considered in making an award
decision
State Single Point of Contact (E.O. 12372)
DHHS has determined that this program is not subject to Executive
Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,'' because
it is a program that is national in scope and does not directly affect
State and local governments. Applicants are not required to seek
intergovernmental review of their applications within the constraints
of E.O. 12372.
Deadline for Submission of Applications
The closing date for submission of applications under this
announcement is July 6, 1998. Applications must be postmarked or hand
delivered to the application receipt point no later than 5 p.m. on July
6, 1998. Hand-delivered applications will be accepted Monday through
Friday, excluding federal holidays, prior to and on July 6, 1998,
during the working hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. in the lobby of the Hubert
H. Humphrey building located at 200 Independence Avenue, SW. in
Washington, DC. When hand-delivering an application, call (202) 690-
8794 from the lobby for pick up. A staff person will be available to
receive applications.
An application will be considered as meeting the deadline if it is
either: (1) Received at, or hand-delivered to, the mailing address on
or before July 6, 1998, or (2) postmarked before midnight of the
deadline date, July 6, 1998 and received in time to be considered
during the competitive review process.
When mailing applications, applicants are strongly advised to
obtain a legibly dated receipt from a
[[Page 25053]]
commercial carrier (such as UPS, Federal Express, etc.) or from the
U.S. Postal Service as proof of mailing by the deadline date
(Applicants are cautioned that express/overnight mail services do not
always deliver as agreed). If there is a question as to when an
application was mailed, applicants will be asked to provide proof of
mailing by the deadline date. When proof is not provided, an
application will not be considered for funding. Private metered
postmarks are not acceptable as proof of timely mailing.
A. Late Applications
Applications which do not meet the July 6, 1998 deadline are
considered late applications and will not be considered or reviewed in
the current competition. DHHS will send a letter to this effect to each
late applicant.
B. Extension of Deadlines
DHHS reserves the right to extend the deadline for all proposals
due to acts of God, such as floods, hurricanes, or earthquakes; or if
there is a widespread disruption of the mail; or if DHHS determines a
deadline extension to be in the best interest of the government.
However, DHHS will not waive or extend the deadline for any applicant
unless the deadline is waived or extended for all applicants.
C. Initial Screening
Applications will be initially screened for compliance with the
timeliness, completeness, and cost-sharing requirements. If judged in
compliance, the application then will be reviewed by government
personnel, augmented by outside experts where appropriate.
Mailing Address and Application Forms
Application instructions and forms should be requested from and
submitted to: Grants Officer, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, 200
Independence Avenue, SW., Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building,
Washington, DC 20201, Phone (202) 690-8794. Copies of this program
announcement and many of the required forms may also be obtained
electronically at the ASPE World Wide Web Page http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov.
You may fax your request to (202) 690-6518 to the attention of the
Grants Officer. Application submissions may not be faxed or sent
electronically.
The printed Federal Register notice is the only official program
announcement. Although reasonable efforts are taken to assure that the
files on the ASPE World Wide Web Page containing electronic copies of
this Program Announcement are accurate and complete, they are provided
for information only. The applicant bears sole responsibility to assure
that the copy downloaded and/or printed from any other source is
accurate and complete. Requests for forms and questions (administrative
and technical) will be accepted and responded to up to 30 days prior to
closing date of receipt of applications.
Also see section entitled ``Components of a Complete Application.''
All of these documents must accompany the application package.
Length of Application
Applications should be as brief as possible but should assure
successful communication of the applicant's proposal to the reviewers.
In no case shall an application (excluding the resumes, appendix and
other appropriate attachments) be longer than 20 single spaced pages.
Applications should be neither unduly elaborate nor contain voluminous
supporting documentation. Videotapes and cassette tapes may not be
included as part of a grant application for panel review. A signed
original and two (2) copies of each application are required.
Applicants are encouraged to send an additional four (4) copies of
their application to ease processing, but applicants will not be
penalized if these extra copies are not included. The application's
Form 424 must be signed by the applicant's representative authorized to
act with the full authority on behalf of the applicant
Review Process and Evaluation Criteria
Selection of the successful applicant will be based on the
technical and financial criteria described in this announcement.
Reviewers will determine the strengths and weaknesses of each
application in terms of the evaluation criteria listed below, provide
comments and assign numerical scores. The review panel will prepare a
summary of all applicant score and strengths/weaknesses and
recommendations and submit it to ASPE for final decisions on the award.
The point value following each criterion heading indicates the
maximum numerical weight that each section will be given in the review
process. An unacceptable rating on any individual criterion may render
the application unacceptable. Consequently, applicants should take care
to ensure that all criteria are fully addressed in the applications.
Applications will be judged according to the criteria set forth below:
1. Goals, Objectives, and Potential Usefulness of the Analyses (20
points). The potential usefulness of the project and how the
anticipated results of the proposed project will advance knowledge and
development in the field of teen pregnancy prevention. Applicants will
be judged on the extent to which the proposed evaluative approach
addresses the interests of ASPE and whether findings will contribute to
the current knowledge base on teen pregnancy prevention programs and
which strategies are the most promising.
2. Quality and Soundness of Methodology and Evaluation Design (40
points). The appropriateness, soundness, and cost effectiveness of the
methodology, including the evaluation design, statistical techniques,
analytical strategies, selection of existing data sets, and other
procedures. Reviewers will judge the overall program/intervention that
is being evaluated, the existing evaluation design and the proposed
enhancement to that evaluation funded by this announcement. Reviewers
will consider the following about the program/intervention: (1) Period
of time the program has been in existence, (2) target population, (3)
theoretical base of program, (4) geographical location, and (5)
intensiveness.
Reviewers will consider the following in assessing the existing
evaluation and the proposed enhancement to the evaluation: (1) A
sufficiently large sample size, (2) long-term follow-up, (3) measures
of behavior rather than just attitudes and beliefs, (4) a comparison or
control group (5) proper statistical analyses, and an (6) independent
evaluators. Applicant should explain further if any of these criteria
are not met.
Reviewers will also judge the ability of the applicant's proposed
methodology to reliably attribute impacts. Reviewers will consider if
the types of assurances regarding protection of human subjects, in
areas like confidentiality, informed consent, etc. are provided.
3. Qualifications of Personnel and Organizational Capacity (20
points). The qualifications of the project personnel for conducting the
proposed evaluation as evidenced by professional training and
experience, and the capacity of the organization to provide the
infrastructure and support necessary for the project. Reviewers will
evaluate the applicant's principal investigator and staff on evaluation
experience and their demonstrated evaluation skills. Principal
investigator and staff time
[[Page 25054]]
commitments also will be a factor in the evaluation.
4. Ability of the Work Plan and Budget to Successfully Achieve the
Project's Objectives (20 points). Reviewers will examine if the work
plan and budget are reasonable and sufficient to ensure timely
implementation and completion of the evaluation enhancement and whether
the applicant demonstrates an adequate level of understanding by the
applicant of the practical problems of conducting such a project.
Reviewers will judge whether there is an ``added benefit'' from
providing these funds. In other words, is the applicant using federal
funds for purposes that would not otherwise be funded? Reviewers will
also consider whether the budget assures an efficient and effective
allocation of funds to achieve the objectives of this solicitation and
whether the application has additional funding from other sources.
Eligible projects must document sufficient funding for program
operation during the period of the evaluation and also document
sufficient funding for the existing evaluation component. The applicant
should provide budget statements from previous award/s that contribute
to the completion of the evaluation. Applicants without these funds or
the documentation that certifies these funds will be ineligible to
receive any points in this category. Reviewers will judge if the
applicant has adequately demonstrated its ability to present findings
and produce a final report that can be widely disseminated by ASPE or
its designee (s).
Disposition of Applications
1. Approval, Disapproval, or Deferral
On the basis of the review of the application, the Assistant
Secretary will either: (a) Approve the application as a whole or in
part; (b) disapprove the application; or defer action on the
application for such reasons as lack of funds or a need for further
review. However, nothing commits the Assistant Secretary to making an
award or limits the ability to make multiple award.
2. Notification of Disposition
The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation will notify the
applicants of the disposition of their applications. If approved, a
signed notification of the grant award will be sent to the business
office named in the ASPE checklist.
Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number is 93-239.
Components of a Complete Application
A complete application consists of the following items in this
order:
1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424);
2. Budget Information--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 424A);
3. Assurances--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 424B);
4. Table of Contents;
5. Budget Justification for Section B Budget Categories;
6. Proof of Non-Profit Status, if appropriate;
7. Copy of the applicant's Approved Indirect Cost Rate Agreement;
8. Project Narrative Statement;
9. Any appendices or attachments;
10. Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace;
11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, or other
Responsibility Matters;
12. Certification and, if necessary, Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;
13. Supplement to Section II--Key Personnel
14. Application for Federal Assistance Checklist
Margaret A. Hamburg,
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
[FR Doc. 98-11963 Filed 5-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4151-04-P
