[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 118 (Thursday, June 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33411-33417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-16083]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation;
Supporting State Efforts to Link Administrative Data Systems for the
Purpose of Studying the Effects of Welfare Reform on Other State and
Federal Public Assistance Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation,
HHS.
ACTION: Request for grant applications from states to link their
administrative program data for the purposes of studying the effects of
the newly implemented Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
program on recipients and on other state and federal governmental
assistance programs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation (ASPE) announces the availability of funds and invites
applications for data linking projects that will allow for improved
program management,
[[Page 33412]]
monitoring, and research and evaluation activities. The primary purpose
of this grant is to provide states with funding that will enable them
to link administrative program data from TANF and related State welfare
programs with administrative data from at least one other source. The
resulting data set can then be used to support research into the
effects of TANF on recipients and other government programs. While
efforts may be targeted in any area where there is potential
interaction between TANF and other government programs, ASPE has
identified six specific areas of policy interest. These areas are
outlined in section II, Topics of Priority Interest.
CLOSING DATE: The closing date for submitting applications under this
announcement is August 18, 1997.
FOR APPLICATION KITS OR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administrative
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) 401-6639.
Part I. Background and Purpose
A. Background
On August 22, 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of
1996. This law terminated the 61 year-old Aid to Families with
Dependent Children program and several related, smaller programs. In
its place, the PRWORA established a federal block grant, which gives
states great flexibility to develop their own programs and strategies
for providing assistance to the poor. Over time, state programs
targeted toward the poor are likely to diverge in the new block grant
environment. Over the coming years, it will become increasingly
important to understand the effects of these changes on recipients,
caseloads, and state and federal budgets, in order to assess the need
for and scope of future state and federal welfare policy. It will also
be important to understand the ways in which the varying TANF programs
affect other state and federal programs targeted toward the poor. For
example, do a state's changes to its welfare programs improve the
access and utilization of medical care among poor children? Does a
state's TANF program result in more children being abused, neglected,
and placed in the homes of relatives, thereby increasing the burden on
the child welfare system? Are new state programs more effective at
targeting victims of domestic violence, and offering services and
supports for victims who are so identified?
State administrative program data offer a potentially rich source
of information on the welfare population. They can therefore be used to
answer many of the questions surrounding the effects of the new welfare
law. Several states have been linking their administrative program data
from a variety of anti-poverty programs for many years, while other
states have begun more recently. These databases have provided valuable
insight into the characteristics of people served by assistance
programs, how program participation varies across different groups of
individuals, and how individuals access and utilize multiple services
over time. ASPE believes that these databases will prove valuable in
analyzing the collateral effects that TANF may have on recipients and
on other state and federal programs.
B. Purpose
Given that linked administrative program data have a tremendous
potential for assessing the impact of TANF on recipients and other
programs, the primary purpose of this grant is to provide states with
the necessary funding to link administrative program data from the TANF
program with administrative data from at least one other source in
order to address at least one policy relevant topic. The resulting data
set can then be used by the state to examine the interactions between
TANF and other governmental programs. For states that do not currently
have a database which contains linked program data, this grant will
provide the seed money and impetus for its creation. For states which
do have such a database, this funding can enable the state to add
administrative data from programs that are not currently represented in
the database. While the grant only requires TANF data to be linked with
data from one other program, preference will be given to projects which
would link data from multiple programs, as such projects would likely
provide a greater understanding of how TANF interacts with multiple
programs.
Applicants should also consider the time-frame of the information
to be included in the database. All projects must include case-level
information collected under the new law, which was signed in August of
1996 (states are required to convert to their TANF plans by July 1,
1997). However, preference will be given to those projects which
include historical data, so that comparisons can be drawn between prior
state AFDC programs--and their relationship to other assistance
programs--and new TANF programs.
Note that while a completed research product is not required under
this grant, eligible proposals must include a detailed research agenda
applicable to the resulting data. This must include the names of
qualified researchers who have expressed interest in analyzing the data
set. Letters of support from interested researchers and their
respective institutions are also strongly encouraged.
C. Eligible Applicants and Funding
We are specifically seeking proposals from state agencies which
operate either a TANF program or another state or federal assistance
program targeted toward the poor. Counties with a total population of
at least 500,000 which operate a county-based welfare system may also
apply. Applicants must also have and present proof of a state-wide (or
where appropriate, county-wide) database that links micro-level
administrative program data from at least two programs serving low-
income children and families. If an applicant does not currently have
such a database, then the applicant must present proof that such a
database will be operational and maintained subsequent to the
completion of this project.
Approximately $400,000 is available with funds appropriated for
fiscal year 1997. It is expected that approximately 4 awards at an
average of $100,000 for 12 months will be awarded. More projects may be
funded if additional funding becomes available in fiscal year 1998.
Part II. Topics of Priority Interest
These grants are designed to support state efforts to improve their
data infrastructure so that they can better assess the impacts of
welfare reform on other state and federal programs, as well as on
recipients. There are, therefore, no specific limitations as to the
topical areas that applicants may apply to explore with linked
administrative data. The following section contains six areas of
particular interest that ASPE has identified as relevant in the context
of the new welfare law. While each of the topical areas present a range
of issues, the possible research questions are in no way meant to be
exhaustive. If prospective applicants have additional questions which
they feel are relevant within the context of welfare reform and its
effect on other assistance programs--for example, the use of
administrative data to assess program use for children who have lost
SSI benefits--they are
[[Page 33413]]
encouraged to raise them in their proposal.
ASPE also understands that there is a great degree of variation in
the amount and scope of administrative program data that states
collect. It is therefore highly unlikely that every state would have
administrative data related to all of the issues and questions raised
in the following section. These issues are only meant as a guide to
assist prospective applicants in framing the scope of data to be linked
under this grant. Additionally, projects are not limited solely to
administrative data. Where appropriate and feasible, applicants may
choose to link their administrative data with either survey data or
other available data.
I. Supporting Services in the Transition From Welfare to Work
The new legislation establishes a five year time limit for the
receipt of federal TANF assistance, and a requirement that all able-
bodied caretaker recipients enroll in a work or work-training program
after two cumulative years of aid. This increased emphasis on work
raises questions as to whether states can provide sufficient services
to support the transition from welfare to work. Of specific concern are
assistance programs other than TANF, such as Medicaid and Food Stamps,
which recipients can use while transitioning between welfare and work.
The accessibility and affordability of quality child care are also
important determinants of the ability to leave welfare permanently.
Medicaid and Food Stamps
For TANF recipients who leave welfare, either for work or as the
result of a sanction or time limit, Medicaid and Food Stamps are likely
to assume even greater importance as transitional support mechanisms.
Both programs offer forms of assistance after eligibility for TANF has
expired. By linking individual level case data from both Medicaid and
Food Stamps, it may be possible to examine how TANF recipients combine
assistance from multiple programs, and how the combination of benefits
from these programs affects exits from welfare and/or sustained
financial independence.
Analysis of linked administrative data may also contribute to our
understanding of how welfare reform affects participation in both the
Medicaid and Food Stamps programs. If states make changes in Medicaid
eligibility, for example, how do these changes affect program
enrollment, participation patterns, and service utilization?
Additionally, many states are considering welfare diversion programs,
which would provide up-front cash assistance, in the hopes that a one-
time cash payment may eliminate the need for on-going TANF assistance.
Administrative data may also support analysis of the relationship
between diversion programs and participation in Medicaid and Food
Stamps.
Child Care
The provision of child care is also a critical support service of
any state TANF program. Just as with work programs, the new legislation
gives states considerably more latitude in how they provide and fund
child care. There are several groups of families that may be affected
by child care: current welfare recipients enrolled in work programs,
former recipients who are transitioning from welfare to work, and
families who are at-risk of entering welfare. There are several
important questions and concerns about the provision of child care for
all of these groups.
Basic types of care arrangements: To what extent is child
care available for people required to work and what are the most common
arrangements? What is the quality of each of these arrangements? How do
the patterns of usage vary among recipients enrolled in work programs
and former recipients no longer receiving welfare services? What are
the subsidy rates available for each group? To what extent are eligible
recipients taking advantage of services?
Welfare exits and child care: What is the effect of
welfare exits on child care? How do child care arrangements change once
people leave welfare, either via work or because they have been removed
from welfare due to sanctions or time limits? If child care funding is
limited for families transitioning off of welfare, where do the
children receive services, and what are the budgetary implications of
providing these services?
Child Support
While cooperation with child support was a requirement under AFDC,
changes under TANF both decrease and increase child support's
importance to low income families. In states that choose to eliminate
the $50 disregard, payment of child support becomes irrelevant to the
income of families receiving cash TANF payments. This change could
decrease the willingness of both resident and non-resident parents to
cooperate with the child support system, even though the requirements
for cooperation with the program for TANF and Food Stamp program
recipients have increased However, for families reaching the TANF time-
limits or trying to minimize the receipt of TANF cash payments, child
support can be an important supplement to low-wage or part-time
employment and in some cases may make it possible for families to
bridge short periods of unemployment without resorting to TANF cash
payments. It is important to understand how these changes in child
support policy affect the behavior of both resident and non-resident
parents in cooperating with child support, in viewing the fairness of
work activity which may require recipients to work off TANF benefits
already recouped through child support payments, in using child support
as an income supplement to low wages, and in the non-resident parent's
provision of financial and non-financial support for his family.
II. Relationships Between TANF and the Child Welfare System
It is possible that welfare reform will create additional financial
and social stress for many families, particularly those of long term
welfare recipients. Among the possible manifestations of such stress,
including the curtailing of welfare as an income source for some
household heads, are child neglect and abuse and the short-or long-term
dissolution of some particularly fragile families. Transfer of custody
of some children to grandparents or other relatives may also become a
more attractive option for parents whose benefits are sanctioned or who
become ineligible for assistance because of time limits or other
restrictions.
Are changes in child living arrangements correlated with the
imposition of time limits, sanctions, and work requirements? For
instance, are increasing numbers/proportions of children cared for by
relatives other than parents (either as assistance units headed by
relatives or as child-only assistance units)? Or are increasing
numbers/proportions of children neglected or abused, or entering foster
care, following the elimination of financial assistance to a family?
Linkages between welfare program administrative data and child welfare
data systems may assist in the investigation of such questions.
III. Impact of Teen Pregnancy and the Provision of Services to Teen
Parents
The PRWORA requires that any minor teen parent who is receiving
federally funded TANF services must live at home or in an adult
supervised setting unless there is a good cause exemption. It will be
important to determine how this affects both the population of teens
who are currently receiving welfare
[[Page 33414]]
services, and also those teens who will become pregnant and may require
TANF services subsequent to a state's implementation of TANF. For
example, what are the positive and negative consequences of this
provision? Are more teens living in supervised settings and completing
high school? Are teens losing welfare benefits or failing to qualify
for them because of non-compliance with this provision? If so, then how
many of these teens, and how many of their children, will instead
require services through other social service programs, such as the
child welfare system?
Additionally, since potential harm to the teen or her child would
qualify as a good cause exemption, there may be an increase in the
reporting of child abuse and neglect. Linking TANF data with
information from both child abuse and neglect reporting systems and
from child welfare systems will help clarify the effects of TANF on
teen parents receiving TANF services.
The new law also permits states to use TANF funds for family
planning and abstinence education. Through linking TANF data with
information from the providers of these services, a state could begin
to examine how these funds are being used and how adequately they are
being targeted toward TANF families. Additionally, if TANF data are
linked with Medicaid or Vital Statistics data, then a state could
assess how effective these services are with respect to decreasing teen
pregnancies among welfare recipients.
IV. Impact of TANF on Out-Of-Wedlock Births and Fertility Patterns
One of the four principal goals of the TANF program is to ``prevent
and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies.'' This emphasis
is coupled with the law's illegitimacy bonus, which awards funds to up
to five states that are most successful in reducing out-of-wedlock
births among women of all ages. States are designing and implementing
an array of programs aimed at reducing the number of births to
unmarried mothers. It will be important to assess the impacts of these
programs, both on the overall population, and more specifically on
those individuals receiving TANF assistance. Some specific questions
are as follows:
Do programs aimed at reducing out-of-wedlock birth rates
among the welfare population, such as family cap policies, actually
affect subsequent births on welfare mothers? If so, what is the
direction and magnitude of the change? Or do these policies encourage
welfare recipients to place children in different living situations
(relatives, for example) where they are eligible for assistance either
through the foster care system or as a separate AFDC/TANF unit?
Additionally, do these policies have any effect on a state's abortion
rate? If so, what are the direction and magnitude of the effect?
Does a stronger focus on work requirements and personal
responsibility have an impact on fertility? Specifically, what are the
fertility patterns of welfare recipients required to work and how do
they change over time? How do the changes in fertility patterns affect
caseloads and costs in other programs, such as Medicaid and the child
welfare system?
Given time limits and the increased emphasis on work, it
is likely that exits from welfare will increase significantly in the
coming years. It will be important to study how the fertility patterns
of people who lose benefits due to sanctions, time limits, and/or other
prohibitions differ from those remaining on assistance, and to
determine whether children born to those individuals removed from
assistance receive services in other government programs.
V. Domestic Violence
Many welfare recipients are victims of violence at the hands of
intimate partners. Evidence from Massachusetts suggests that about 20
percent of the women who received AFDC benefits in 1996 had been
subjected to violence within the past year. Many more had been
victimized in the past (Allard et al., 1997). In studies of welfare to
work programs, domestic violence has been identified as a significant
barrier to job training and employment.
The new welfare statute allows states to exempt battered women from
various welfare program requirements. In keeping with these provisions,
a number of states are planning to identify and provide services to
battered recipients and consider exemptions when necessary. These
states will need to include some type of data on this problem in their
information systems. Data may also be available on women who have been
involved with the judicial and law enforcement systems. For research
purposes, it may be possible to link data across these systems to study
differences in welfare participation between recipients who are
battered and those who are not so identified. It may also be possible
to identify supports provided to battered recipients.
Issues around domestic violence also play a role in determining
whether applicants and recipients of TANF benefits must cooperate with
the child support enforcement system or be given a good cause
exemption. Despite the high rates of domestic violence, good cause is
requested in less than .2 percent of TANF cases, and granted in about
.1 percent of cases. There have been no studies linking reported
incidents of domestic violence and the request for or granting of good
cause.
VI. Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Clients with substance abuse and mental health disorders present
particular challenges to welfare reform. Substance abuse is a
significant barrier to self sufficiency for some welfare recipients.
Estimates of the prevalence of substance abuse vary widely, but most
estimates conclude 10-20 percent of adults receiving AFDC have
substance abuse problems. The prevalence of substance abuse among
particular subgroups of the welfare population, such as long term
recipients, may be higher, although little data is currently available
on this topic (National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Directors, 1996). Among female substance abuse treatment clients with
children in their households, 64 percent were found to rely on welfare
income in the year prior to treatment admission (Gerstein et al.,
1997). One recent study found that approximately 38 percent of both
homeless and low income housed women had a current mental health
disorder, and nearly 70 percent had one during their lifetimes (Bassuk
et al., 1996). Many of the women with current disorders report
receiving some type of mental health services.
It is assumed that persons with substance abuse and mental health
disorders are likely to be over-represented in welfare receiving
populations and particularly among those reaching time limits, failing
to comply with program requirements, or subject to sanctions. To date,
however, no information has been available to test these assumptions.
It may be possible using administrative data from substance abuse and
mental health treatment systems and/or the Medicaid program, to
establish whether clients known to have substance abuse and mental
health disorders (whether or not such disorders are known to welfare
caseworkers) differ from other clients in their welfare utilization
patterns.
Part III. Application Preparation and Evaluation Criteria
This part contains information on the preparation of an application
for submission under this announcement, the forms necessary for
submission and the evaluation criteria under which the
[[Page 33415]]
applications will be reviewed. Potential applicants should read this
part carefully in conjunction with the information provided in Part II.
Application Forms
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 and concise as possible, but assure
communication of the applicant's proposal to the reviewers. In no case
shall the project narrative exceed 30 double spaced pages exclusive of
appropriate attachments. Only relevant attachments should be included,
for example, resumes of key personnel. Videotapes, brochures, and other
promotional materials will be discarded and not reviewed. Project
narratives should be formatted with 1 inch margins, no less than 10
point font, double spaced lines, with consecutively numbered pages.
Applications should be assembled as follows:
1. Abstract: Provide a one-page summary of the proposed project.
The abstract should clearly identify the following: the data sources to
be linked, the research agenda for the resulting data, and, where
applicable, the priority topic listed in Part II above.
2. Goals, Objectives, and Usefulness of Project: Include an
overview which describes the need for the proposed project; outlines
the reasons why these particular data sources are appropriate; proposes
a research agenda that utilizes the potential of the resulting data
set; and describes in general how the proposed project will advance
scientific knowledge and policy development. This section should also
summarize the applicant's overall strategy that pertains to the use of
administrative data in the evaluation of welfare reform strategies, and
how ASPE's funding fits into the overall scheme of the project.
3. Methodology and Design: Provide a description and justification
of how the proposed data-linking project will be completed, including
methodologies, approach to be taken, data sources to be used and
linked, and proposed research and analytic plans. This section should
clearly identify which data sources will be used, the time-period that
the data capture, the population covered by the data, and the method(s)
which will be used to link the data. Additionally, a discussion of how
the administrative data will be cleaned and checked for accuracy must
be included. The proposals should also provide proof that the grantee
has obtained the necessary authorization to access and link all data
sources proposed within the scope of the project. The preferred form of
proof is a signed interagency agreement with each of the relevant
agencies/departments. Though not preferable, letters of support from
the appropriate agencies are acceptable, provided that the letter
clearly states that the proposing agency has the authorization to
access and link all necessary data. This section should also include a
concise and specific discussion of how the case or individual level
data will be kept confidential. Applicants must assure that the
collected data will only be used for management and research purposes,
and that all information will be kept completely confidential, and
should present the methods that will be used to ensure confidentiality
of records and information once data are made available for research
purposes.
4. Experience of Personnel/Organizational Capacity: Briefly
describe the applicant's organizational capabilities and experience in
conducting relevant projects using linked administrative program data.
Identify the key staff who are expected to carry out the data
organization and linking, as well as those who plan to conduct research
with the resulting data. Provide a curriculum vitae for each person. Be
sure to include a brief discussion of how each key staff member will
contribute to the success of the project.
5. Ability to Sustain Data Linkages After Completion of Funding: A
successful proposal must present evidence that the data linkages
established in this project will become institutionalized into an on-
going database. The proposal should describe how the linking of data
will become institutionalized, which agency will have responsibility
for and jurisdiction over the resulting data, what mechanisms will be
instituted to determine who will have access to the data for program
management, monitoring, and research purposes, and the sources of
financial and staff support for maintaining the database. Proposals
should also relate the extent to which the data will be used for future
policy planning, research and evaluation.
6. Work plan: A Work plan should be included which describes the
start and end dates of the project, the responsibilities of each of the
key staff, and a time line which shows the sequence of tasks necessary
for the completion of the project. Identify the other time commitments
of key staff members, for example, their teaching or managerial
responsibilities as well as other projects in which they are involved.
The Work plan should include a discussion of any plans for
dissemination of the results, such as papers, articles, or conference
presentations, as well as any types of documentation for the data set
that is to be produced through this grant. Finally, the work plan must
include how the data linked under this grant will eventually be made
available for research and evaluation purposes. If one or more public
use tapes are anticipated, then this should be specified. If public use
tapes are not planned, then the work plan must specify how interested
and qualified researchers will be allowed access to the data.
7. Budget: Submit a request for Federal funds using Standard Form
424A and provide a proposed budget using the categories listed on this
form. A narrative explanation of the budget should be included which
explains in more detail what the funds will be used for. If other
sources of funds are being received to support aspects of this
research, the source, amount, and other relevant details must be
included. The proposal should also clearly specify whether state
support will be included, and if so, the type and amount of such
support.
All applicants must budget for two trips to the Washington, DC
area, for at least two people on each trip. As part of this grant, ASPE
would like to schedule two meetings for all funded projects. The first
meeting will be for planning purposes, where applicants will have the
opportunity to meet, discuss their projects, and receive feedback from
both the other grantees and from ASPE staff. This meeting will occur
not more than two months after the proposals are funded. The second
meeting will be approximately 6 to 8 months into the grant period, and
will provide grantees the ability to meet and discuss their progress to
date, and assess and receive assistance with any problems that have
arisen.
Review Process and Funding information
Applications will be initially screened for compliance with the
timeliness and completeness requirements. Five (5) copies of each
application are required. One of these copies must be in an unbound
format, suitable for copying. If judged in compliance, the application
then will be reviewed by government personnel, augmented by outside
experts where appropriate.
The panel will review the applications using the evaluation
criteria listed below to score each
[[Page 33416]]
application. These review results will be the primary element used by
the ASPE in making funding decisions.
HHS reserves the option to discuss applications with other Federal
agencies, Central or Regional Office staff, specialists, experts,
States and the general public. Comments from these sources, along with
those of the reviewers, may be considered in making an award decision.
As a result of this competition, between 3 and 4 grants are
expected to be made from funds appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
Additional awards may be made depending on the extensiveness of the
data involved and the available funding, including funds that may
become available in FY98. The Department reserves the right to make
fewer awards, if enough suitable proposals are not received. The
average grant is expected to be between $100,000 and $125,000.
Deadline for Submission of Applications
The closing date for submission of applications under this
announcement is August 18, 1997. 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 August 18, 1997 or (2)
postmarked before midnight five days prior to August 18, 1997 and
received in time to be considered during the competitive review process
(within two weeks of the deadline date). Applications may not be faxed.
When mailing application packages, applicants are strongly advised
to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial carrier (such as
UPS, Federal Express, etc.), or from the U.S. Postal Service as proof
of mailing by the deadline date. 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.
Hand-delivered applications will be accepted Monday through Friday
prior to and on August 18, 1997 during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:30
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 pickup. A staff
person will be available to receive applications. Applications which do
not meet the August 18, 1997 deadline will not be considered or
reviewed. HHS will send a letter to this effect to each late applicant.
HHS reserves the right to extend the deadline for all applications
if there is widespread disruption of the mail because of extreme
weather conditions or natural disasters or if HHS determines an
extension to be in the best interest of the Government. However, HHS
will not waive or extend the deadline for any applicant unless the
deadline is waived or extended for all applicants.
Selection Process and Evaluation Criteria
Selection of the successful applicants will be based on the
technical criteria laid out 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 scores, strengths, weaknesses and recommendations.
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 reviewed as follows:
Evaluation Criteria
1. Goals, Objectives, and Potential Usefulness of the Analyses (20
points). Scoring will be based on the need for the project, the
potential usefulness of the objectives, and how the anticipated results
of the proposed project will advance policy development and program
management. The research agenda will be scrutinized to determine
whether the issues are relevant in the context of TANF, and whether the
research questions can actually be addressed with administrative data.
Scoring will also be based on the extent to which this specific project
is representative of the applicant's overall plan for using
administrative data to study the implementation and effectiveness of
the TANF program, and how TANF interacts with other assistance
programs. Preference will be given to those projects which link TANF
data with administrative data from two or more other State or Federal
social service assistance programs.
2. Methodology and Design (30 points). Scoring will be based on
whether the data sources included are appropriate for carrying out the
proposed research agenda, including the time frame of the data linked
and the population covered by the data. Concerning the time-frame of
the data, preference will also be given to those projects which link
historical data (pre-TANF implementation), as well as data collected
subsequent to the date which the state TANF program became operational.
A critical scoring element will be the proposal's discussion of the
methods used to clean, standardize and link the case level data from
the different sources. Applicants should discuss thoroughly how they
intend to match case records from different data sources, and what
internal validity checks will ensure the accuracy of the matches. The
architecture for the resulting data set should also be discussed
thoroughly. Other design considerations include whether the agency
applying has already obtained authorization to obtain and use data from
the different state or local agencies whose data would be linked, and
how confidentiality of the records and information will be ensured. It
applicants are unable to ensure the security of information included in
the project, then it is highly unlikely that they will receive funding.
3. Qualifications of Personnel and Organizational Capability (20
points). The principle scoring criteria are the qualifications of the
project personnel involved as evidenced by their professional training
and experience. Proposals should clearly articulate the experience of
applicable staff in similar projects that deal with linking
administrative data and assembling large databases. The capacity of the
organization to provide the infrastructure and support necessary for
the project is also an important concern.
4. Work Plan and Budget (15 points). Is the plan reasonable? Are
the activities sufficiently detailed to ensure successful, timely
implementation? Do they demonstrate an adequate level of understanding
by the applicant of the practical problems of conducting such a
project? Is the proposed budget reasonable and sufficient to ensure
completion of the project?
5. Ability to Sustain Project After Funding (15 points). How will
the linking of data sources become an institutionalized function within
the agency once the grant funding expires? Where will the newly created
data set reside? What agency(ies) will have responsibility for and
jurisdiction over the resulting data? What are the sources of financial
and staff support for maintaining the database? How will the linked
data be used for future policy planning, research and evaluation?
[[Page 33417]]
Disposition of Applications
1. Approval, Disapproval, or Deferral
On the basis of the review of an application, the ASPE will either
(a) approve the application in whole, as revised, or in part for an
amount of funds and subject to such conditions as are deemed necessary
or desirable for the research project; or (b) disapprove the
application; or defer action on the application for such reasons as a
lack of funds or a need for further review.
2. Notification of Disposition
The ASPE will notify the applicants of the disposition of their
application. A signed notification of the award will be issued to
notify the applicant of the approved application.
3. The Assistant Secretary's Discretion
Nothing in this announcement should be construed as to obligate the
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation to make any awards
whatsoever. Awards and the distribution of awards among the priority
areas are contingent on the needs of the Department at any point in
time and the quality of the applications which are received.
Components of a Complete Application
A complete application consists of the following items in this
order:
1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424, Revised
4-88);
2. Budget Information--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form
424A, Revised 4-88);
3. Assurances--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 424B,
Revised 4-88);
4. A Table of Contents;
5. Budget Justification for Section B--Budget Categories;
6. Proof of nonprofit status, if appropriate;
7. A copy of the applicant's approved indirect cost rate agreement
if necessary;
8. Project Narrative Statement, organized in five sections
addressing the following topics:
(a) Abstract,
(b) Goals, Objectives and Usefulness of the Project,
(c) Methodology and design,
(d) Background of the Personnel and Organizational Capabilities and
(e) Work plan (timetable);
9. Any appendices/attachments;
10. Certification Regarding Drug-Free Work place;
11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other
Responsibility Matters;
12. Certification and, if necessary, Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;
Reports
The grantee must submit quarterly progress reports and a final
report. The specific format and content for these reports will be
provided by the project officer.
State Single Point of Contact (E.O. No. 12372)
The Department of Health and Human Services has determined that
this program is not subject to Executive Order No. 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. No. 12372.
Dated: June 13, 1997.
David F. Garrison,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
[FR Doc. 97-16083 Filed 6-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4151-04-P
