[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-16284]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: July 6, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Social Security Administration

 

Federal Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance

[Program Announcement No. SSA-ORS- 94-1]
AGENCY: Social Security Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Announcement of the availability of fiscal year 1994 funds for 
Section 1110 research grants.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Social Security Administration (SSA) announces that 
competing applications will be accepted for new research grants 
authorized under Section 1110 of the Social Security Act. This 
announcement, consisting of three parts, describes the nature of the 
grant activities and gives notice of the anticipated availability of 
fiscal year (FY) 1994 funds in support of the proposed activities. Part 
I discusses the purpose of the announcement and briefly describes the 
application process. Part II describes the programmatic priorities 
under which SSA is soliciting applications for funding. Part III 
describes the application process and provides guidance on how to 
submit an application.

DATES: The closing date for the receipt of grant applications in 
response to this announcement is September 6, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR BACKGROUND MATERIAL CONTACT: Ms. Faye Aziz, 
Coordinator for Extramural Research; Office of Research and Statistics; 
Social Security Administration; Van Ness Center, room 205; 4301 
Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20008; telephone (202) 282-
7215.

Part I. Purpose and the Grants Process

A. Program Purpose

    This research is intended to add to existing knowledge and to 
improve methods and techniques for the management, administration, and 
effectiveness of SSA programs. Professionals in actuarial science, 
demography, economics, sociology and related fields are potential users 
of the results.
    In general, SSA will fund types of projects that relate to or 
examine:
    1. Women's issues, especially aged women in poverty.
    2. Economic and demographic assumptions used in making projections 
for the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust 
Funds.
    3. Issues related to an increase in the retirement age.
    4. Issues, using the New Beneficiary Data System, on how aged 
individuals become poor and how the economic status of individuals with 
disabilities and their families change.
    5. Issues related to differences in calculated poverty rates 
between the Survey of Income Program Participation (SIPP) and the 
Current Population Survey (CPS).

B. FY 1994 Grant Process

    The grant application process for FY 1994 will consist of a one-
stage, full application. Applications are limited to 20 single- or 40 
double-spaced pages (excluding resumes, forms, etc.) and must relate to 
the selection criteria established for review of applications.
    Priority areas in this announcement permit applicants to propose 
research efforts from 12 to 24 months in duration. In item 11 of the 
Face Sheet (page 1 of form SSA-96-BK) indicate the priority area under 
which the application is submitted, i.e., ORS-94-001, ORS-94-002, etc.

Part II. Priority Research Areas

    In particular, the following projects will be considered for 
funding:

A. Economic Circumstances of Aged Widows--ORS-94-001

    A high proportion of the elderly who are economically vulnerable 
are widowed women. Although as a group they experience one of the 
highest rates of poverty, approximately three-quarters of widows aged 
65 or older are not poor. Data from the SIPP provide an opportunity to 
understand the economic circumstances of aged widows and to identify 
those factors that are associated with their late-life poverty.
    Proposals are sought for SIPP-based research that conducts two 
types of analyses of the poverty of aged widows. The first of these 
tasks is to provide a comprehensive description of the personal, 
financial, and environmental characteristics of poor elderly widows. 
These characteristics will include details of income amounts and 
specific sources, assets, personal and household characteristics (e.g., 
age, race, education, work history, fertility history, welfare 
recipiency history, health status, urban vs rural location, age at 
which widowhood occurred). This descriptive material should compare and 
contrast the incidence of poverty and its circumstances for aged widows 
with similar measures for single elderly women who have never married, 
aged married women, and, where sample size permits, elderly divorced 
women.
    The second task is to simulate the resulting economic scenario for 
married women aged 65 or older in the event of the death of their 
husbands. This will involve projecting the time path of income and 
assets for the widow, given the couple's economic circumstances at time 
of the SIPP interviews. The hypothetical widow's income should be based 
on Social Security and Supplemental Security Income program rules, any 
pension income she has earned in her own right, whether a husband with 
public or private pension rights has elected a survivor's option, asset 
income, the couple's life insurance holdings, and so forth. It is 
expected that, where possible, the economic status of the couple prior 
to the husband's death will be related to factors such as lifetime work 
experience of each spouse, current health status and health insurance 
coverage, etc. In addition, various scenarios for asset decumulation 
associated with health expenditures brought on by the husband's death 
might be introduced to account for reduced assets subsequently 
available to the surviving spouse [See Linda Del Bene and Denton R. 
Vaughan, ``Income, Assets and Health Insurance: Economic Resources for 
Meeting Acute Health Care Needs of the Aged,'' Social Security 
Bulletin, Spring 1992]. We are interested in learning how the economic 
status of aged widows compares with their circumstances prior to the 
husband's death, whether particular background factors can be used to 
predict which married women are particularly at risk of poverty in 
their old age, and how the incomes and assets of widows change as the 
duration of widowhood increases.
    Grant proposals must be based on well-developed rigorous analysis. 
Applications may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24 
months in duration.
    The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for 
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application 
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget 
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the 
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the 
availability of FY funds.
    It is anticipated that an amount up to $100,000 will be allocated 
to fund one project under this priority area for the initial 12-month 
budget period.

B. Selected Economic and Demographic Assumptions Used to Project the 
Financial Status of the OASDI Trust Funds--ORS-94-002

    The annual reports of the Board of Trustees of the Federal OASDI 
Trust Funds contain long-range, 75-year projections on the financial 
status of the trust funds. The assumptions and methodology underlying 
those projections were reviewed by the Panel of Technical Experts (the 
Panel) convened by the quadrennial Advisory Council on Social Security 
and recommendations for research were made. (The ``Social Security 
Technical Panel Report to the 1991 Advisory Council on Social 
Security'' and its appendices were reprinted in the November and 
December 1990 issues of the Social Security Bulletin.)
    To address some of the Panel's recommendations for research, the 
principal topics of this priority are to better understand: (i) the 
determinants of changes in productivity and earnings, and how to 
develop better methods of projecting future productivity and earnings; 
(ii) the determinants of nominal and real interest rates and of how to 
project them; (iii) the determinants of fertility and how to project 
future fertility rates; (iv) the determinants of mortality and how to 
project future mortality rates; (v) the analysis of illegal immigration 
and how to project such immigration; and (vi) the conceptual framework 
for the current low-cost and high-cost projections.
    Among the questions to be addressed on productivity and earnings 
are: What are the determinants of linkages between productivity and 
earnings, particularly hours of work and fringe benefits? What are the 
effects of the changing quality (including the question of measuring 
quality) and demographic mix of the labor force? What are the effects 
of research and development by both the public and the private sectors? 
What are the effects of capital formation by the public sector (e.g., 
public infrastructure) and by the private sector? What is the effect of 
the increasing integration of U.S. and foreign markets? Are there 
analytical methods or strategies for selecting which averaging periods 
are most appropriate in determining the various economic assumptions? 
What is the long-term relationship, if any, between productivity and 
earnings and other economic and demographic factors?
    Among the questions to be addressed on nominal and real interest 
rates are: To what extent can the current structure of interest rates 
be used to predict future interest rates? What are the determinants of 
inflation and are there analytical methods for projecting future 
inflation rates? What strategies are optimal for incorporating both 
historical and current interest rate information into the projections? 
What is the long-term relationship, if any, between nominal and real 
interest rates and other economic and demographic variables?
    Among the questions to be addressed on fertility patterns in this 
priority area are: What are the determinants of fertility and changes 
in fertility? What is the relationship between age at first birth and 
the total fertility rate? How do birth rates of immigrants and of their 
children compare with those of non-immigrants and their children? Will 
future trends in fertility rates by race and ethnic group mirror past 
trends? For assumptions used in projecting fertility, can an analytical 
framework be developed to help decide how much weight to put on long-
term trend information and how much weight to put on the most recent 
trends? Is there empirical evidence supporting alternative weighting 
schemes?
    Among those questions to be addressed on mortality are: What are 
the determinants of mortality and rates of change in mortality? What 
evidence is there for projecting changes in mortality for specific 
causes (e.g., cancer, heart, etc.) based on changes in smoking, 
nutrition, and other lifestyle patterns? For assumptions used in 
projecting mortality, can an analytical framework be developed to help 
decide how much weight to put on long-term trend information and how 
much weight to put on the most recent trends? Is there empirical 
evidence supporting alternative weighting schemes?
    Among the questions to be addressed on illegal immigrants are: 
Estimates of current numbers, labor-force participation rates, and 
rates of immigration of illegal immigrants; analysis of factors likely 
to affect future immigration rates of illegal immigrants and 
projections based on this analysis; the length of coverage and average 
earnings of illegal immigrants and the length of time they remain in 
the country; and the extent to which illegal immigrants receive 
benefits based upon their coverage under the system.
    Among the questions to be asked with respect to the conceptual 
framework for the current low-cost and high-cost projections are: 
Although theoretically, the current low-cost and high-cost projections 
represent a collection of extreme values for each of the variables, how 
should these bounds be interpreted--as absolute bounds on what could 
possibly happen, as confidence levels, as illustrative alternative 
projections, or as sensitivity analyses? (Attention should be given to 
the way in which rates of inflation are incorporated into the low-cost 
and high-cost projections.) Should the projections incorporate 
interrelationships among the economic and demographic variables (for 
example, among others, interactions among fertility, marital status, 
labor force participation, and birth expectations), and if so, which 
interrelationships are critical, and how should they be incorporated?
    Grant proposals must be based on well-developed rigorous analysis. 
Applications may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24 
months in duration.
    The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for 
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application 
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget 
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the 
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the 
availability of FY funds.
    It is anticipated that up to $240,000 will be allocated to fund one 
or more projects under this priority area for the initial 12-month 
budget period.

C. Issues Related to the Scheduled Increase in the Retirement Age--ORS-
94-003

    The Social Security Amendments of 1983 (Public Law 98-21) provide 
for a gradual increase in the age at which unreduced retired-workers 
benefits are first payable (for brevity, the retirement age) from 65 to 
67 between the years 2000 and 2027. Benefits for retired workers still 
will be available at age 62, but the amount payable will be gradually 
reduced from the currently payable 80 percent of the unreduced benefit 
to 70 percent. It has further been proposed to speed up the phase-in to 
a higher retirement age, and to increase the retirement age to 68 (70 
in one proposal). At least one proposal also increases the early 
retirement age to 65. (The executive summary of the report mandated by 
Congress and consultant reports were reprinted in the October 1986 and 
February 1987 issues of the Social Security Bulletin.)
    1. The increase in retirement age is based on the assumption that 
the increase in life expectancy has been accompanied by a corresponding 
improvement in health and capacity to work. But past studies are 
inconclusive about the relationship between longevity and work ability, 
especially among persons in their sixties. Proposals are sought to 
further investigate these relationships, using either new approaches, 
more current data, and/or new databases.
    One possible approach would be to use microdata collected by the 
National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to examine trends in health and 
ability to work. Data should be presented for subgroups of major 
interest for the retirement age issue (both early and normal 
retirement), subject to sampling error problems. A wide range of 
variables that measure health and ability to work should be included.
    2. The retirement-age increase may also impact on the Social 
Security Disability Insurance (DI) program. Studies are needed to 
address questions such as: (i) what is the expected impact on the 
number of DI beneficiaries and their duration on the rolls and on the 
DI Trust Fund; (ii) how many workers would qualify for DI benefits at 
age 65 and 66 and how many would elect to receive benefits; and (iii) 
among those aged 62-64 who do not now elect to apply for DI benefits, 
how many might do so because of the additional reduction in benefits 
for early retirement that accompanies a retirement-age increase 
(including the elimination in some proposals of early benefits for 
workers aged 62-64)?
    Grant proposals must be based on well-developed, rigorous analysis. 
Applicants may submit applications for funding not to exceed 17 months 
in duration.
    The applications should include a budget for the total period of 
the grant (not to exceed 17 months). If the application is approved, a 
grant will be awarded for the entire budget period of the grant. It is 
anticipated that up to $190,000 will be allocated to fund one or more 
projects for up to 17 months under this priority area.

D. Analyses of the New Beneficiary Data System--ORS-94-004

    This project is intended to encourage research with the New 
Beneficiary Data System (NBDS) developed by SSA over the past decade to 
study the changing circumstances of aged and disabled beneficiaries. 
Based initially on a survey of new beneficiaries at the beginning of 
the 1980's, the dataset has been expanded with information from 
administrative records (on benefits, covered earnings, Supplemental 
Security Income, and Medicare) and followup interviews with survivors 
from the original survey. With the exception of the Medicare records, 
all administrative data have been obtained both for respondents and 
spouses.
    The original sample contained representative samples of new Social 
Security beneficiaries who filed for benefits as retired workers, 
disabled workers, wives, widows, divorced wives, and surviving divorced 
wives. There was also a representative sample of persons aged 65 and 
over who were entitled to Medicare benefits but who had not yet 
received Social Security cash benefits. The aged sample was, for the 
most part, in its mid- to late-60's in 1982 and in its mid- to late-
70's in 1991. Some of the sample members were affected by the ``notch'' 
that was created when legislation was enacted to correct for an 
overcompensation in the benefit formula for inflation.
    The original interview covered a wide range of topics, including 
demographic characteristics, marital and childbearing history, 
employment history, current income (in the format of the SIPP) and 
assets, and health. The followup interview, in addition to asking many 
of the same questions as the original interview, collected a history of 
critical events since 1982 (such as widowhood or divorce, work 
cessation, migration, and the sale of the home) and the financial 
impact of these critical events. The original health items of work 
disability, functional capacity, and presence of major diseases were 
expanded to assess specific Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental 
Activities of Daily Living, private health insurance provisions, and 
the longest experience in a long-term care facility. Disabled workers 
who returned to work were asked about their job search experience, 
employer accommodations to their disability, and their use of 
vocational and rehabilitation services.
    Background material and a compilation of reports based on the 1982 
New Beneficiary Survey are available. These reports were also published 
in various editions of the Social Security Bulletin from 1983 to 1993.
    Using the NBDS, the following projects will be considered for 
funding:
1. Understanding How Aged Beneficiaries Become Poor
    Although poverty rates among the aged have declined substantially 
over the last 30 years, there are still some troublesome problems and 
poverty among aged women is a particular concern. Various legislative 
proposals have been made or discussed to improve the treatment of women 
under the Social Security program, including care-giving credits, 
increasing benefits at some age, eliminating the actuarial reduction 
for early benefit receipt at some age, modifying the Social Security 
special minimum benefit, and redesigning couple benefits in order to 
enhance survivor benefits. However, many of the proposals are not well 
targeted to the poor. Proposals for research are sought to increase our 
understanding of why aged beneficiaries, and especially aged women, 
become poor, which will improve our ability to form policy in this 
area.
    Some of the key research questions are: To what extent is aged 
poverty a continuation of a lifetime of low income? To what extent is 
aged poverty a result of aged couples decumulating assets as they age? 
What are the economic effects of widowhood, including the extent to 
which sources of income are lost or reduced, and the extent to which 
high health care expenditures surrounding the death of a spouse are a 
major cause of high poverty rates among the aged who have become 
widowed? Is the type of social security benefit received (retired 
worker benefits, wife or widow benefits, worker benefits that are 
supplemented because of entitlement to a higher spouse or survivor 
benefit and those that are not, retirement benefits that were converted 
from a disability benefit at age 65 and those that were not) related to 
differing poverty rates in 1982, and are those patterns the same among 
beneficiaries 10 years later? How different is the role of major 
sources of income (including social security, other pensions, asset 
income, earnings, and Supplemental Security Income--an SSA-administered 
``safety net'' program) in 1991 than it was in 1982?
2. Changing Economic Status of Individuals With Disabilities and Their 
Families
    We know that newly disabled individuals in 1982 were less well-off 
than newly retired individuals in terms of both income and assets. 
However, little or no research has been done to follow disabled 
individuals over time to determine whether they have particular 
problems maintaining an adequate standard of living. The well-being of 
many individuals with disabilities depends not only on their own income 
but also on the income and/or services provided by family members, such 
as the earnings of spouses, or help with activities of daily living 
that may mean the difference between living in the community and having 
to be institutionalized.
    Among the questions to be addressed are: How adequate are the 
income and assets of individuals with disabilities just after benefit 
receipt and 10 years later? To what extent do disabled individuals 
maintain their economic status over this period of time? What factors 
are associated with changes in economic status over the period? How do 
family members affect the economic status of disabled workers?
    Analyses should include background factors (such as demographic 
characteristics, previous occupational characteristics and earnings, 
living arrangements, family characteristics, and health conditions), 
major changes in life circumstances (such as widowhood or divorce, 
changes in living arrangements, or a spouse changing hours of work or 
retiring), sources of income, changes in the health status, and health-
care costs and how these factors relate to various economic outcomes.
    Proposals should identify the expected methods of analysis, the 
possible variables to be considered, and the logic for inclusion. 
Application may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24 
months in duration.
    The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for 
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application 
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget 
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the 
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the 
availability of FY funds.
    It is anticipated that up to $190,000 will be allocated to fund one 
or more projects for the initial 12-month budget period under this 
priority area.

E. Documenting and Explaining SIPP-CPS Differences in Aged Poverty 
Rates--ORS-94-005

    The official poverty measure and its three derivative statistics 
(poverty counts, poverty rates and poverty gaps) are important and 
frequently used criteria employed in the formulation of policy and the 
evaluation of program outcomes for the aged and disabled populations 
served by SSA.
    Twelve-month poverty rates based on the SIPP are somewhat lower for 
many population subgroups than the poverty rates estimated from the 
CPS. Much of the comparison of poverty rates from the two surveys has 
been based on the first operational SIPP panel (the 1984 panel) which 
pertained to the 1983-85 time period. In the 1984 panel context, SIPP-
CPS poverty rate differences for the aged, were, if anything, less 
marked than for younger age groups. Based on a review of published 
poverty rate estimates based on SIPP panels for 1985-1990 and 
comparison to corresponding estimates based on the CPS, it appears that 
a significant change in the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in poverty 
rates appeared with the introduction of the 1985 SIPP panel. Key 
features of the change in the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in 
poverty rates include: 1) a modest decline in the poverty rate for all 
ages in the SIPP relative to the CPS; 2) a much more marked SIPP-CPS 
difference in poverty rates for the aged than the nonaged (with SIPP 
rates for the aged ranging between 28 and 34 percent below those based 
on the CPS); 3) a marked attenuation of the tendency for poverty rates 
to increase strongly with age among those age 65 and older in the SIPP 
context as compared with the CPS. Furthermore, preliminary research 
conducted at SSA indicates that SIPP--CPS poverty rate differences 
among the aged appear to vary significantly by sex, age, marital 
status, race and ethnicity; differences appear to be particularly 
marked for persons who are married, white, or age 85 or older.
    Studies are needed (1) to describe more fully the pattern of SIPP--
CPS differences in poverty estimates for the aged, and (2) to 
establish, if possible, the factors giving rise to the observed 
differences. SIPP-CPS differences should be delineated for population 
subgroups defined in terms of salient characteristics such as marital 
status, more broadly defined aspects of family composition, including 
the presence of nonaged family members, age, race and ethnicity. 
Differences should, at a minimum, be characterized in terms of poverty 
counts, rates, and the poverty gap. Particular attention should be 
given to evaluating possible differences between the two surveys in the 
portrayal of poverty as it relates to increasing age. Given that the 
pattern of poverty by population subgroup is of particular interest, 
the relatively small sample size available in single SIPP panels as 
compared with the CPS is likely to be of some concern. If, as is 
suggested by review of published estimates, it can be shown that the 
basic patterns of SIPP-CPS differences are stable across the post-1984 
SIPP panels, serious consideration should be given to pooling the post-
1984 panels in order to support as detailed a subgroup analysis as is 
possible, given the substantially larger sample sizes available from 
pooled samples. If the combining of SIPP panels seems feasible, the 
combined panels should be employed to support the explanatory phase of 
the overall study, as well.
    After developing a plan for documenting more fully SIPP-CPS 
differences in the portrayal of poverty among the aged, the grantee 
might discuss how the observed differences might be explained. In this 
regard a critical review of the literature that has considered the 
differences between poverty rate estimates from the Panel Study of 
Income Dynamics (PSID) and the CPS might prove quite useful in 
generating hypotheses and in formulating empirical approaches to 
testing the hypotheses. While several possible factors are likely to be 
suggested by this review (e.g., sample weighting, particularly that 
component of the overall weighting scheme designed to deal with panel 
attrition; differing operationalizations of the income unit; differing 
income concepts; and the quality of income data), emphasis in empirical 
work should be given to the last factor, the relative quality of the 
income data from the two surveys. However, some attention could also be 
given to the change in SIPP-CPS differences in poverty estimates that 
occurred with the introduction of the 1985 SIPP panel.1 The nature 
of each hypothesized factor to be considered and how it might cause the 
observed pattern of SIPP-CPS differences might be described. A closely 
reasoned plan for empirically assessing the possible impact data 
quality on the differences in SIPP-CPS poverty rates for the aged may 
be presented. Particular emphasis should be given to explaining the 
relevance of each proposed test for clarifying the observed pattern of 
SIPP-CPS differences, notwithstanding the fact that it may not be 
possible to devise fully unambiguous tests of the effects of income 
data quality on the observed SIPP-CPS differences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The prospective grantee will find it useful to consult recent 
work conducted by the Bureau of the Census comparing income 
estimates for calendar year 1990 from the two surveys and Report no. 
17, Studies in Income Distribution, for similar material related to 
SIPP/CPS differences for the 1983-84 period. Recent work conducted 
at the Bureau of the Census by Lamas, Tin and Eargle about the 
effect of attrition in the SIPP context on differences in SIPP-CPS 
poverty rates should also be consulted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the level of available funding, empirical work should be 
limited to describing the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in poverty 
estimates (rates, counts, and gaps).
    As much of the study will revolve around comparison of alternative 
estimates within or between survey contexts, issues of statistical 
inference also need to be given careful consideration. In particular, 
given the results of SSA research on the variance properties of SIPP-
based estimates of the aged, standard errors for SIPP estimates should 
be based on the generalized variance parameters as estimated by SSA 
(see the note by Bye and Gallicchio appearing in the winter 1993 Social 
Security Bulletin) or calculated directly from the survey file using 
the methods outlined in the Bye-Gallicchio article.
    Grant proposals must be based on well-developed, rigorous analysis. 
Applicants may submit applications for funding not to exceed 17 months 
in duration.
    The applications should include a budget for the total period of 
the grant (not to exceed 17 months). If the application is approved, a 
grant will be awarded for the entire budget period of the grant.
    It is anticipated that an amount up to $135,000 will be allocated 
to fund one or more projects for up to 17 months under this priority 
area.

    Note: To foster the sharing of research, principal investigators 
for each grant awarded will be required to (1) include in the final 
report an executive summary which SSA could publish in the quarterly 
Social Security Bulletin and (2) discuss the results of their 
research with SSA staff. Funds should be included in the grant 
budget for a meeting at the SSA Office of Research and Statistics, 
Washington, DC.

Part III. Application Process

A. Eligible Applicants

    Any State or local government, public or private organization, 
nonprofit or for-profit organization, or agency, hospital, or 
educational institution may apply for a grant under this announcement. 
Applications will not be accepted from applicants which do not meet the 
above eligibility criteria at the time of submission of applications.
    Individuals are not eligible to apply. For-profit organizations may 
apply with the understanding that no grant funds may be paid as profit 
to any grant recipient. Profit is considered as any amount in excess of 
the allowable costs of the grant recipient. A for-profit organization 
is a corporation or other legal entity which is organized or operated 
for the profit or benefit of its shareholders or other owners and must 
be distinguishable or legally separable from that of an individual 
acting on his/her own behalf.

B. Availability and Duration of Funding

    SSA anticipates allocating up to $100,000 to fund the initial 12-
month budget period of a 24-month grant for one project in priority 
area ORS-94-001, ``Economic Circumstances of Aged Widows.'' SSA 
anticipates allocating up to $240,000 to fund the initial 12-month 
budget period for one or more projects in priority area ORS-94-002, 
``Selected Economic and Demographic Assumptions Used to Project the 
Financial Status of the OASDI Trust Funds.'' SSA anticipates allocating 
up to $190,000 to fund one or more projects not to exceed 17 months in 
duration in priority area ORS-94-003, ``Issues Related to the Scheduled 
Increase in the Retirement Age.'' SSA anticipates allocating up to 
$190,000 to fund the initial 12-month budget period of 24-month grants 
for one or more projects in priority area ORS-94-004, ``Analysis of the 
New Beneficiary Data System.'' Also, SSA anticipates allocating up to 
$135,000 to fund one (1) or more projects not to exceed 17 months in 
duration in priority area ORS-94-005, ``Documenting and Explaining 
SIPP-CPS Differences in Aged Poverty Rates.''

C. Grantee Share of the Project Costs

    Grant recipients receiving assistance to conduct these research 
projects are expected to contribute towards the project costs. 
Generally, 5 percent of the total costs is considered acceptable. No 
grant will be awarded that covers 100 percent of the project's costs.

D. The Application Process for Proposals Requesting Grant Funds

    Organizations wishing to compete for grants under this announcement 
must submit an application by September 6, 1994. Applications received 
in response to this announcement will be reviewed by Federal and non-
Federal personnel.
    Successful applicants may expect funding during the fourth quarter 
of FY 1994 (prior to September 30, 1994).
1. Availability of Application Forms
    Application kits which contain the prescribed application forms for 
grant funds are available from the Grants Management Staff; Division of 
Contract and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and Grants; Social 
Security Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710 Gwynn Oak 
Avenue; Baltimore, MD 21207; telephone (410) 965-9500; Mr. Lawrence H. 
Pullen, Chief, Grants Management Staff.
    When requesting an application kit, the applicant should refer to 
program announcement number SSA-ORS-94-1 and the date of this 
announcement to ensure receipt of the proper application kit.
2. Additional Information
    For additional information concerning project development, please 
contact Ms. Faye Aziz, Coordinator for Extramural Research; Office of 
Research and Statistics; Social Security Administration; Van Ness 
Center, Room 205; 4301 Connecticut Avenue, NW; Washington, DC 20008; 
telephone (202) 282-7215.
3. Application Submission
    All applications requesting Federal grant funds must be submitted 
on the standard forms provided by the Grants Management Staff. The 
application shall be executed by an individual authorized to act for 
the applicant organization and to assume for the applicant organization 
the obligations imposed by the terms and conditions of the grant award.
    As part of the project title (page 1 of the application form SSA-
96-BK, item 11), the applicant must clearly indicate the application 
submitted is in response to this announcement (SSA-ORS-94-1) and must 
show the appropriate priority area project identifier (i.e., ORS-94-
001, ORS-94-002 etc.).
    Applications must be submitted to: Grants Management Staff; 
Division of Contract and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and 
Grants; Social Security Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710 
Gwynn Oak Avenue; Baltimore, MD 21207.
4. Application Consideration
    Applications are initially screened for relevance to this 
announcement. If judged irrelevant, the applications are returned to 
the applicants. Applications that conform to the requirements of this 
program announcement will be reviewed and evaluated against the 
criteria specified in No. 6(b) of this announcement and evaluated by 
Federal and non-Federal personnel. The results of this evaluation will 
assist SSA in selecting the applications to be funded.
5. Application Approval
    Grant awards will be issued within the limits of Federal funds 
available following the approval of the applications selected for 
funding. The official award document is the ``Notice of Grant Award.'' 
It will provide the amount of funds awarded, the purpose of the award, 
the budget period for which support is given, the total project period 
for which support is contemplated, the amount of grantee financial 
participation, and any special terms and conditions of the grant award.
6. Criteria for Screening and Reviewing of Applications
    (a) Screening Requirements. In order for an application to be in 
conformance, it must meet all of the following requirements:
    (1) Number of Copies: An original signed application and two copies 
must be submitted. Five additional copies are optional and will 
expedite processing of the grant application.
    (2) Length: The narrative portion of the application (Part III of 
form SSA-96-BK) must not exceed 20 single- or 40 double-spaced pages, 
exclusive of resumes, forms, etc., typewritten on one side only using 
standard size (8\1/2\''  x  11'') paper. Applications should neither be 
unduly elaborative nor contain voluminous documentation.
    (3) Non-Federal Contribution (Match): Grant recipients must 
contribute towards the project costs (cash or in-kind). Generally, 5 
percent of the total costs is acceptable. SSA will not provide 100 
percent or total funding for any project grant.
    (b) Evaluation Criteria. Applications which pass the screening 
process will be reviewed by at least three individuals. Reviewers will 
score the applications, basing their scoring decisions on the criteria 
shown below. 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 
application. Relative weights for the criteria are shown in 
parentheses.
(1) Project Objective: (25 points)
    How closely do the project objectives fit those of the 
announcement? Is the need for the project discussed in terms of the 
importance of the issues to be addressed? Does it describe how the 
project builds upon previous research? What is the potential usefulness 
of the anticipated result and expected benefits to the target groups? 
What is the potential usefulness of the proposed project for the 
advancement of scientific knowledge?
(2) Project Design: (30 points)
    Is the design of the project adequate and feasible as indicated by 
the appropriateness of the work statement and the technical approach, 
including: (a) a concise and clear statement of goals and objectives; 
(b) theoretical analysis of the problem and, if appropriate, hypotheses 
to be tested and/or parameters to be estimated; (c) specification of 
data sources; (d) plan for data analysis, including appropriateness of 
statistical methods to be used; and (e) scheduling of tasks and 
milestones in the progress of the project? Does the proposal describe 
specific plans for conducting the project in terms of the tasks to be 
performed, and how the approach proposed will accomplish the project 
objectives?
(3) Qualifications: (30 points)
    Do the qualifications of the project personnel, as evidenced by 
training, experience, and publications, demonstrate that they have the 
knowledge of subject matter and skills required to competently carry 
out the research and to produce a final report that is comprehensible 
and usable? Is the staffing pattern appropriate for the proposed 
research, linking responsibilities clearly to project tasks?
(4) Organization and Budget: (15 points)
    Are the resources needed to conduct the project specified, 
including personnel, time, funds, and facilities? Are any collaborative 
efforts with other organizations clearly identified and written 
assurances referenced? Is all budget information provided, including a 
description by category (personnel, travel, etc.) of the total of the 
Federal funds required? Where appropriate, are justifications and 
explanations of costs provided? Are the project's costs reasonable in 
view of the level of effort and anticipated outcome? Does the 
applicant's organization have adequate facilities and resources to 
plan, conduct, and complete the project?

    Please Note: For-profit organizations may not use grant funds to 
purchase equipment under the grant. Equipment means tangible, non-
expendable, personal property having a useful life of more than 1 
year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit.
7. Closing Date for Receipt of Applications
    The closing date for receipt of grant applications for Federal 
funds in response to this announcement is September 6, 1994.
    Applications may be mailed or sent by commercial carrier or 
personally delivered to: Grants Management Staff; Division of Contract 
and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and Grants; Social Security 
Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710 Gwynn Oak Avenue; 
Baltimore, MD 21207.
    Hand-delivered applications are accepted during the hours of 8:00 
a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. An application will be 
considered as meeting the deadline if it is either:
    (a) Received on or before the deadline date at the above address; 
or
    (b) Mailed through the U.S. Postal Service or sent by commercial 
carrier on or before the deadline date and received in time to be 
considered during the competitive review and evaluation process. 
Applicants are cautioned to request a legibly dated U.S. Postal Service 
postmark or to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial carrier 
as evidence of timely mailing. Private metered postmarks are not 
acceptable as proof of timely mailing.
    Applications which do not meet the above criteria are considered 
late applications. SSA will notify each late applicant that its 
application will not be considered.

    Note: Facsimile copies will not be accepted.

Notice Procedures

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This notice contains reporting requirements in the ``Application 
Process'' section. However, the information is collected using form 
SSA-96-BK, Federal Assistance, which has Office of Management and 
Budget clearance No. 0960-0184.

Executive Orders 12372 and 12416--Intergovernmental Review of Federal 
Programs

    This program is not covered by the requirements of Executive Order 
12372, as amended by Executive Order 12416, relating to Federal 
agencies providing opportunities for consultation with State and local 
elected officials on proposed Federal financial assistance or direct 
Federal development.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance: Program No. 93.812, Social 
Security-Research and Demonstration)

    Dated: June 22, 1994.
Shirley S. Chater,
Commissioner of Social Security.
[FR Doc. 94-16284 Filed 7-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4190-29-P