[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6603-6608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3510]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Discretionary Cooperative Agreements to Support the Demonstration 
and Evaluation of Safe Communities Programs

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Announcement of discretionary cooperative agreements to support 
the demonstration and evaluation of Safe Communities Programs

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

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
announces the second year of a discretionary cooperative agreement 
program to demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe 
Communities concept for traffic safety initiatives. The Safe 
Communities program offers communities a new way to control traffic 
injuries. This approach recognizes that traffic-related deaths and 
injuries are primarily a local community problem that is best solved at 
the local level. The Safe Communities program adopts a comprehensive 
injury control approach to address traffic injury problems. Recognizing 
that traffic fatalities are only a small part of the total traffic 
injury problem, Safe Communities focuses on non-fatal injuries as well 
as fatal injuries to define the traffic safety problem, and asks who is 
paying the costs of the injuries. Four characteristics define the Safe 
Communities approach: Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and 
linkage where possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in 
setting priorities, and movement towards an integrated and 
comprehensive injury control system.
    In 1996 under Phase I of this demonstration and evaluation program, 
cooperative agreements were awarded to the Greater Dallas Injury 
Prevention Program and the East Carolina University/Eastern Carolina 
Injury Prevention Program. This notice solicits applications from 
public and private, non-profit, and non-for-profit organizations, 
governments and their agencies, or a consortium of these organizations 
that are interested in developing, implementing and evaluating the Safe 
Communities approach in their community. The funds from this program 
may only be used to support traffic safety activities within the larger 
context of community injury control efforts. Private contractors, 
working on behalf of community groups are not eligible to apply. 
Preference will be given to those applications which help NHTSA meet 
its needs to obtain geographic diversity, urban/rural mix, diversity in 
lead organization(s); potential for replication in other communities, 
and/or other factors deemed relevant by NHTSA.
    NHTSA anticipates awarding two (2) demonstration and evaluation 
projects for a period of three years each as a result of this 
announcement.


[[Page 6604]]


DATES: Applications must be received at the office designated below by 
3:00 PM on or before May 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted to the National Highway 
Traffic Administration, Office of Contracts and Procurement (NAD-30), 
ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301, Washington, D.C. 
20590. All applications submitted must include a reference to NHTSA 
Cooperative Agreement Program No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Interested 
applicants are advised that no separate application package exists 
beyond the contents of this announcement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General administrative questions along 
with requests for copies of the OMB Standard Form 424-Application for 
Federal Assistance and Certified Assurances may be directed to Amy 
Poling, Office of Contracts and Procurement. All questions and requests 
may be directed by e-mail at [email protected] or, if necessary, at 
202-366-9552. Programmatic questions relating to this cooperative 
agreement program should be directed to Barbara Sauers, Traffic Safety 
Programs, NHTSA, NTS-22 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590, 
by e-mail at [email protected] or, if necessary, at 202-366-0144. 
NHTSA intends to post this Federal Register Announcement and OMB 
Standard Form 424 on the NHTSA home page at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov 
under ``What's Hot''.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The past several decades witnessed dramatic advances in medical 
care and shifts in health behaviors. Despite the advances, injuries 
remain a major health care problem, and the leading cause of death for 
persons from age 1 to 44. Fatalities, however, are only a small part of 
the total injury picture. For each injury-related death, there are 19 
injury hospitalizations and over 300 injuries that require medical 
attention. These injuries account for almost 10 percent of all 
physician office visits and 38 percent of all emergency department 
visits. For an individual, these injuries can vastly diminish quality 
of life. For society, injuries pose a significant drain on the health 
care system, incurring huge treatment, acute care and rehabilitation 
costs.
    Motor vehicle injuries, in particular, are the leading cause of all 
injury deaths and the leading cause of death for each age from 5 
through 27. Motor vehicle-related injuries are the principal cause of 
on-the-job fatalities, and the third largest cause of all deaths in the 
U.S. Only heart disease and cancer kill more people. However, far more 
people are injured and survive motor vehicle crashes than die in these 
crashes. In 1995, for example, while over 41,000 persons were killed in 
motor-vehicle related incidents and almost 3.4 million were injured. 
These injured persons often required medical care and many required 
long-term care. The costs of these injuries are enormous, over $150.5 
billion each year in economic costs and $17 billion in medical costs.
    The vast majority of these injuries and deaths are not acts of 
fate, but are predictable and preventable occurrences. Injury patterns, 
including traffic-related injury patterns, vary by age group, gender, 
and cultural group. There are also seasonal and geographic patterns to 
injury. Once the populations, types and locations of crashes and causes 
of injuries that are associated in the community with increased 
severity and high costs are identified, interventions can be designed 
to address these factors specifically.

Safe Communities: A New Generation of Community Programs

    American traffic safety advocates have traditionally worked in 
partnerships with many organizations and groups to achieve a 
successful, long and established history in preventing and reducing 
traffic-related injuries and fatalities. For over 15 years, community-
based traffic safety programs have been and remain an effective means 
for identifying local crash problems and providing local solutions.
    Building on past success, the Safe Communities program offers 
communities a new way to control traffic injuries. This approach 
recognizes that traffic-related deaths and injuries are primarily a 
local community problem. Effective preventive efforts require a 
coordinated approach involving Federal, State and local organizations. 
The Safe Communities approach adopts a comprehensive injury control 
model to address traffic injury problems within the context of all 
injuries. Recognizing that traffic fatalities are only a small part of 
the total traffic injury problem, Safe Communities focus on fatal and 
non-fatal injuries (as opposed to only fatalities) to define the 
traffic safety problem, and ask who is paying the costs of the 
injuries. Safe Communities recognize the importance of citizens in 
identifying community problems and solutions, as well as the importance 
of partnerships in implementing solutions to community problems.
    The Safe Communities approach represents an evolutionary (rather 
than revolutionary) way in which community programs are established and 
managed. Four characteristics define the Safe Communities approach: 
Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and linkage where 
possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in setting 
priorities, and movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury 
control system. Each of these characteristics is described below.
    Analysis of Multiple Data Bases is critical to Safe Communities 
because addressing traffic-related injuries suggests that not only 
fatalities are reduced, but injuries and health care costs as well. 
This shift from an emphasis on fatalities to one emphasizing injuries 
and cost reduction means that different data bases need to be 
identified. Police crash reports tell only part of the story. Analysis 
of data from health departments, hospitals, EMS providers, business, 
rehabilitation programs, and insurance companies helps project 
managers', community leaders' and others' understanding of the 
magnitude and consequences of traffic injuries and monitoring progress 
in reducing the problem. Even more effective is data linkage which can 
provide opportunities, for example, to identify when and where young 
people in the community drink and drive, their risk for impaired 
driving which result in crashes, the types of injuries which occur, and 
how much these injuries cost the community compared to other types of 
injuries caused by young people who drink. Thus, countermeasures can be 
designated to address these risk factors (e.g., traffic safety and 
violence prevention efforts can join forces to reduce youth access to 
alcohol).
    Expanded partnerships are important to solve local injury problems 
effectively through comprehensive and collaborative strategies. Traffic 
safety advocates have long recognized that traffic problems are too 
complex and resources too limited for them to solve in isolation. As a 
result, over the years, the traffic safety community has worked with 
law enforcement, emergency medical services, local government, schools, 
courts, business, health departments, and community and advocacy 
organizations to reduce traffic injuries. Safe Communities continue to 
work with these existing partners, but also seek to expand the 
partnership base to involve actively the medical, acute care and 
rehabilitation communities. These groups, which have traditionally been 
focused on treating disease, need to be engaged as integral partners in 
preventing injuries.

[[Page 6605]]

    Safe Communities enlist business and employers as full partners in 
community injury prevention activities. Employers need to understand 
how traffic-related injuries contribute to their overall costs, and how 
participation in community-wide injury prevention efforts can help them 
reduce their own costs due to motor vehicle injuries. Through 
partnerships and collaboration, Safe Communities spread program 
ownership and delivery systems throughout the community. Finally, Safe 
Communities provide an opportunity for traditional traffic safety 
partners--such as law enforcement and schools--to understand better the 
linkages among risk-taking behaviors. For example, individuals who 
commit traffic offenses may also be involved with other kinds of 
problem or illegal behaviors.
    Citizen involvement and input are essential to establish community 
priorities for identified problems. Town meetings and other techniques 
are routinely used to solicit wide-spread citizen input and feedback 
about community injury problems. Citizens are actively involved 
identifying, designing and implementing solutions to their injury 
problems. Citizens actively participate in problem identification, 
assume responsibility and ownership for shaping solutions, and share in 
both the successes and challenges of their program.
    Movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury control 
system incorporates the elements of prevention, acute care, and 
rehabilitation as active and essential participants insolving community 
injury problems. This is the crux of the Safe Communities approach, and 
often one or more of these groups have not traditionally been involved 
in addressing community traffic injury problems or their involvement 
has focused only on prevention and not their role in the overall 
system. Involvement of the three component groups will not happen 
overnight or in every community, but it is something to strive for over 
time.
    The ``evolutionary shift'' from current programs to Safe 
Communities is summarized in Table 1 (below). Community partners 
participate as equals in developing solutions, sharing success, 
assuming programming risks, planning for self-sufficiency, and building 
a community infrastructure and process for continual improvement of 
community life through reduction of traffic-related injuries, 
fatalities, and costs.

             Table 1.--New Thinking About Community Programs            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Current program emphasis             Evolving program emphasis 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing fatalities.......................  Reducing fatal and non-fatal
                                             injuries & health care and 
                                             social costs.              
Traffic safety as the objective...........  Traffic safety integrated   
                                             into broader injury control
                                             efforts.                   
Prevention-based solutions................  Systems-based solutions     
                                             (integration of prevention,
                                             acute care,                
                                             rehabilitation).           
Agency-based delivery system..............  Community/citizen ownership.
Traditional traffic safety................  Adds new or expanded health,
                                             injury, partners business, 
                                             and government partners.   
Administration evaluation.................  Impact evaluation/cost      
                                             benefit analysis.          
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Objectives

    Under this cooperative agreement the effectiveness of the Safe 
Communities approach for traffic safety initiatives shall be 
demonstrated and evaluated to determine the impact on reducing traffic 
related injuries and associated costs to the community. Specific 
objectives for this cooperative agreement program are as follows:
    1. Work with existing community traffic safety and/or injury 
control coalitions and apply the defining characteristics to establish 
a Safe Communities approach for reducing traffic injuries.
    2. Use community and/or state data, as appropriate, to define the 
community's traffic injury problem within the context of the 
community's overall injury problem. Where possible, population based 
data are preferred. Data sources in addition to police crash reports 
are required for this purpose. The costs of traffic injuries to the 
community (which may include emergency medical services, acute care, 
hospital, medical, rehabilitation, insurance, lost wages, and workmen's 
compensation) are to be documented.
    3. Actively engage community residents in defining both the 
community's traffic injury problem as well as solutions to the problem. 
The grantee shall develop strategies for ensuring wide-spread citizen 
involvement throughout the project.
    4. In addition to traditional traffic safety partners (e.g., law 
enforcement) identify and actively engage health care (both provider 
and payer) and business partners in the Safe Communities approach. The 
grantee is responsible for ensuring active and committed participation 
from these two sectors.
    5. Implement a program to reduce traffic-related injuries in the 
community. The programs could address any area of traffic safety 
including alcohol-impaired driving, use of occupant restraints, 
speeding, emergency medical services, or pedestrian or bicycle safety. 
The intervention program should be based on data and citizen input and 
should actively engage all sectors of the community, including health 
care, business, local government, law enforcement, schools, and media. 
The program should also include elements of an integrated injury 
control system (prevention, acute care and rehabilitation) and/or plans 
for how the program will move towards this type of approach.
    6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe Communities approach in 
reducing traffic-related injuries and associated costs. In addition, 
evaluate the process of establishing a Safe Communities approach (what 
works, what does not work, how to engage partners, how to overcome 
barriers, challenges, how to run challenges into opportunities, etc.)

Availability of Funds

    A total of $800K is available in FY97 to fund this program. Two (2) 
demonstration and evaluation projects will receive awards of $400K each 
to be used over a period of three years. In each project, $150K must be 
dedicated to evaluation activities. Given the amount of funds available 
for this effort, applicants are strongly encouraged to seek other 
funding opportunities to supplement the federal funds and include cost-
sharing plans and commitments.

Period of Performance

    The period of performance for this cooperative agreement will be 
three years from the effective date of award.

NHTSA Involvement

    NHTSA will be involved in all activities undertaken as part of the 
cooperative agreement program and will:
    1. Provide a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) 
to participate in the planning and management of this Cooperative 
Agreement and to coordinate activities between the Grantee and NHTSA.
    2. Provide information and technical assistance from government 
sources within available resources and as determined appropriate by the 
COTR.

[[Page 6606]]

    3. Serve as a liaison between NHTSA Headquarters, Regional Offices 
and others (Federal, state and local) interested in the safe 
communities approach and the activities of the grantee.
    4. Stimulate the transfer of information among grant recipients and 
others engaged in safe communities activities.

Eligibility and Other Applicant Requirements

    Applications may be submitted by public and private, non-profit and 
not-for-profit organizations, and governments and their agencies or a 
consortium of the above. Thus, universities, colleges, research 
institutions, hospitals, other public and private (non- or not-for-
profit) organizations, and State and local governments are eligible to 
apply. Private contractors working on behalf of community groups are 
not eligible to apply. Interested applicants are advised that no fee or 
profit will be allowed under this cooperative agreement program. These 
demonstration projects will require extensive collaboration among each 
of these various organizations in order to achieve the program 
objectives. It is envisioned during the pre-application process, these 
various organizations will designate one organization to prepare and 
submit the formal application.

Applicant Procedures

    Each applicant must submit one original and five copies of the 
application package to: NHTSA, Office of Contracts and Procurement 
(NAD-30), ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301, 
Washington, DC 20590. Applications must be typed on one side of the 
page only, and must include a reference to NHTSA Cooperative Agreement 
No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Unnecessarily elaborate applications beyond what 
is sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this 
invitation are not desired. Only complete packages received by 3:00 PM 
on or before May 1, 1997 will be considered.

Application Content

    Applicants for this program must include the following information:
    1. The application package must be submitted with OMB Standard Form 
424 (Rev. 4-88, including 424A and 424B), application for Federal 
Assistance, with the required information filled in and certified 
assurances signed. While the form 424A deals with budget information, 
and Section B identified Budget Categories, the available space does 
not permit a level of detail which is sufficient to provide for a 
meaningful evaluation of the proposed total costs. A supplemental sheet 
shall be provided which presents a detailed breakdown of the proposed 
costs, as well as any costs which the applicant indicates will be 
contributed locally in support of the demonstration project.
    2. The application shall include a program narrative statement 
which addresses the following information in separately labeled 
sections:
    a. A table of contents including page number references.
    b. A description of the community in which the applicant proposes 
to work. For the purposes of this program, a ``community'' includes a 
city, town or county, small metropolitan area, or even a large 
neighborhood (i.e., it does not have to correspond with a political 
jurisdiction). It should be large enough so that the program can have a 
demonstrable effect on injuries, while not so large as to lose a sense 
of community. The description of the community should include, at a 
minimum, community demographics, the community's traffic injury problem 
using the most recent three years of local and/or state data available 
(including data from multiple sources such as police, hospital, EMS, 
vital records, etc.), a list of data sources available, existing 
traffic safety or injury control coalitions, community resources and 
political structure and commitment.
    c. A preliminary description of the community's traffic injury 
problem, including injury, fatality and cost data. If chosen for award, 
the applicant will be required to conduct a more thorough problem 
analysis that includes input from citizens residing in the community. 
Therefore, a plan on how this more thorough problem analysis will be 
conducted and how citizen input will be obtained is required in the 
proposal.
    d. A description of the goal of the program and how the grantee 
plans to establish a Safe Communities program in the proposed site. 
What will the grantee do to ``move'' the site towards the Safe 
Communities concept? What will be different from existing community 
programs? How will the grantee obtain citizen involvement in setting 
program priorities? What health and business partners will be engaged? 
How will they be engaged? What will they do?
    e. An implementation plan that describes the types of interventions 
or activities proposed to achieve the objectives of the Safe 
Communities program. Given the community motor vehicle injury problem 
analysis, the implementation plan needs to include a description of the 
types of interventions that would be considered and how citizens would 
be engaged in identifying the interventions. The implementation plan 
must also include a discussion of how the applicant will develop the 
final implementation plan; how the plan will relate to the identified 
problems; how citizens, business, health/medical organizations, and 
others will be involved in the delivery of the program; what action the 
community will undertake to reach its objectives; how the intervention 
will be delivered; how delivery will be monitored; and the expected 
results from the intervention. The implementation plan should address 
elements from prevention, acute care and rehabilitation (integrated 
comprehensive injury control system) and/or how the program will move 
towards inclusion of these elements. The implementation plan shall also 
address prospects for program continuation beyond the period of Federal 
assistance.
    f. A proposed evaluation plan (both quantitative and qualitative) 
based on the initial data analysis that describes the kinds of 
questions to be addressed by the evaluation design, what the outcome 
measures are expected to be, how they will be measured, the methodology 
for collecting the data, how often data will be collected, and how the 
data will be analyzed. The plan should indicate how action undertaken 
by the community will be linked with outcome measures. It is important 
that the area encompassed by the Safe Communities program coincide with 
the population covered by the data to be used in the evaluation, or 
that the data systems allow the disaggregation of the relevant 
population.
    g. A description of the full working partnership that has been or 
will be established to conduct the Safe Communities program. The 
application shall describe all the partners (from prevention, acute 
care and rehabilitation) that will participate in the program (e.g. 
local government, law enforcement, health care, injury prevention, 
insurance, business, education, media, citizens) and what the role for 
each partner will be. A complete set of letters of commitment written 
by major partners, organizations, groups, and individuals proposed for 
involvement in this project shall detail what each partner is willing 
to do over the course of the project period (e.g. provide data, staff, 
resources, etc.) Form letters that do not specifically address these 
issues are not acceptable. Letters from owners of the data (injury, 
cost,

[[Page 6607]]

other) required for successful completion of this project must also be 
submitted. These letters must indicate that the data required for the 
project are accessible to the project team.
    h. A description of how the project will be managed, both at the 
applicant level and at the community level. The application shall 
identify the proposed project manager and any support personnel 
considered critical to the successful accomplishment of this project, 
including a brief description of their qualifications and respective 
organizational responsibilities. The roles and responsibilities of the 
grantee, the community and any others included in the application 
package shall be specified. The proposed level of effort in performing 
the various activities shall also be identified. A staffing plan and 
resume for all key project personnel shall be included in the 
application.
    i. A separately-labeled section with information demonstrating that 
the applicant meets all of the special competencies:
    (1) Knowledge and familiarity with data sources such as police 
crash and crime reports, EMS files, emergency department data, hospital 
discharge data, and injury cost data (i.e. cost of injuries to the 
community); and injury surveillance systems (including analyzing and 
linking such data files). Availability of and accessibility to relevant 
data in their community from police crash reports and at least one or 
two injury data sources.
    (2) Capable of:
    i. Designing comprehensive program evaluations;
    ii. Collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative
    iii. Synthesizing, summarizing and reporting evaluation results 
which are usable and decision-oriented.
    (3) Experience in working in partnership with others, especially 
business, health care systems (providers and payers) and government 
organizations, media and with local citizens in implementing solutions 
to community problems.
    (4) Experience in implementing injury control programs (prevention, 
acute care, rehabilitation) at the community level.
    j. A dissemination plan that describes how the results of this 
demonstration and evaluation project will be shared with interested 
parties. The dissemination plan should include preparation of a final 
report and process manual (see reporting requirements), 1-2 briefings 
per year at the NHTSA headquarters, presentation at one or more 
national meetings per year (e.g. APHA, Lifesavers, etc.), and if 
appropriate, preparation and submission of at least one paper for 
publication in a professional journal.

Application Review Process and Evaluation Factors

    Each application package will initially be reviewed to confirm that 
the applicant is an eligible recipient and that the application 
contains all of the items specified in the Application Contents section 
of this announcement. Each complete application from an eligible 
recipient will then be evaluated by an evaluation committee. The 
applications will be evaluated using the following criteria:
    1. Understanding of the Community (10%). The extent to which the 
applicant has demonstrated an understanding of the community, including 
the community's demographics, traffic safety problem, resources 
(including data), and political structure. The extent to which the 
applicant is knowledgeable about community data sources, is able to use 
the data sources to define the community traffic injury problem, and 
has demonstrated the community's need for a safe communities approach 
to controlling traffic injuries and the community's willingness to 
commit and participate in the program. The extent to which the 
applicant has access to the community and potential target populations 
in the community.
    2. Problem Identification (20%). The extent of the applicant's 
capability to identify through the Safe Communities process the 
significance of the traffic injury problem in relation to other types 
of injuries which occur in the community; and to identify among those 
residents involved in motor vehicle crashes the populations, types and 
locations of crashes, human factors issues (e.g., occupant restraint 
usage rates), types of vehicles, and the types of injuries which are 
most associated with increased injury severity and high care costs for 
this community. The problem identification will also be evaluated with 
respect to the potential for the Safe Communities approach to prevent 
or reduce the traffic injury problem.
    3. Goals, Objectives and Implementation Plan (15%). The extent to 
which the applicant's goals are clearly articulated; the objectives are 
time-phased, specific, measurable, and achievable; and the goals and 
objectives relate to identified problems. The extent to which the 
implementation plan will achieve an outcome-oriented result that will 
reduce traffic-related injuries and costs to the community. The 
implementation plan should address what the applicant proposes to 
implement in the community and how this will be accomplished. The 
implementation plan will be evaluated with respect to its feasibility, 
realism, and ability to achieve the desired outcomes as well as 
prospective plans for program continuation beyond the period of Federal 
assistance.
    4. Collaboration (15%). The extent to which the applicant has 
demonstrated experience in a full working partnership for data 
acquisition and analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation of a 
community program; and the extent to which such a partnership has been 
established among the applicant and critical components in the 
community representing prevention, acute care and rehabilitation. Has 
the applicant specified who will be involved in the program and what 
the role of each partner will be? The extent to which the applicant has 
demonstrated access to partners deemed critical to this effort, such as 
health care, business, and local government. Has the applicant shown 
that potential partners are committed to working with the program? In 
what way will potential partners participate? The extent to which the 
applicant describes how citizens will be actively engaged in the safe 
communities program.
    5. Evaluation Plan (15%). How well the applicant describes the 
proposed evaluation design and the methods for measuring the processes 
and outcomes of the proposed interventions (countermeasures). How well 
will the evaluation plan be able to measure the effectiveness of the 
safe communities approach? Does the applicant provide sufficient 
evidence that the proposed community partnership is committed to 
evaluation? Are there sufficient data sources and is there sufficient 
capacity to collaborate with appropriate community program partners to 
ensure access to data; identify/create and test appropriate 
instruments; and collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data 
for measuring the effectiveness of the safe communities approach? How 
well does the applicant ensure the availability of staff and facilities 
to carry out the submitted evaluation plan?
    6. Special Competencies (15%). The extent to which the applicant 
has demonstrated knowledge and experience accessing and using relevant 
data sources, designing and implementing comprehensive program 
evaluations (using both qualitative and quantitative data), 
implementing injury control programs, and working in partnership with 
others on community programs.
    7. Project Management and Staffing (10%). The extent to which the

[[Page 6608]]

proposed staff, including management and program staff and community 
partners, are clearly described, appropriately assigned, and have 
adequate skills and experiences. The extent to which the applicant has 
the capacity and facilities to design, implement, and evaluate a 
complex and comprehensive community program. The extent to which the 
applicant provides details regarding the level of effort and allocation 
of time for each staff position. Did the applicant submit an 
organizational chart and resume for each proposed staff member? Does 
the applicant provide a reasonable plan for accomplishing the 
objectives of the project within the time frame set out in this 
announcement?

Special Award Selection Factors

    Applicants are strongly encouraged to seek funds for the purpose of 
cost-sharing from other federal, State, local and private sources to 
augment those available under this announcement. Applications which 
include a commitment of such funds will be given additional 
consideration.
    For those applications that are evaluated as eligible for award, 
consideration for final award will be made on the basis of geographic 
diversity, urban/rural mix, organizational diversity and potential for 
program replication.

Terms and Conditions of Award

    1. Prior to award, each grantee must comply with the certification 
requirements of 49 CFR part 20, Department of Transportation New 
Restrictions on Lobbying, and 49 CFR part 29, Department of 
Transportation government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-
procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug Free Workplace 
(Grants).
    2. Reporting Requirements and Deliverables:
    a. Quarterly Progress Reports should include a summary of the 
previous quarter's activities and accomplishments, as well as the 
proposed activities for the upcoming quarter. Any decisions and actions 
required in the upcoming quarter should be included in the report. The 
grantee shall supply the progress report to the Contracting Officer's 
Technical Representative (COTR) every ninety (90) days, following date 
of award.
    b. Problem Identification Report, Program Implementation and 
Evaluation Plan: The grantee shall submit a problem identification 
report, program implementation and evaluation plan no more than 9 
months after award of this agreement, or as soon as the Safe 
Communities program has completed the problem identification activity, 
has determined what traffic safety problem or problems will be 
addressed, and determined what program or programs will be implemented 
to reduce the traffic-related injuries. The NHTSA COTR will review and 
comment on this plan.
    The plan should describe the problem identification effort (data 
sources used, how analyzed, and the results including costs of traffic 
injuries to the community), how the communities traffic injury problems 
and proposed solutions were determined, how input was obtained from 
citizens, and how the program will be evaluated. This final evaluation 
plan should describe how the effectiveness of the Safe Communities 
program will be determined and how the process issues involved in 
establishing and implementing a Safe Communities program will be 
determined.
    c. Dissemination Plan:
    i. Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual: The grantee shall 
prepare a Draft Final Report that includes a description of the 
community (including the traffic safety problem and data sources to 
support the problem), partners, intervention strategies, program 
implementation, evaluation methodology and findings from the program 
evaluation. The grantee shall also prepare a Draft Process Manual 
describing what happened in the community in establishing a safe 
communities approach to traffic injury. In terms of technology 
transfer, it is important to know what worked and did not work, under 
what circumstances, and what can be done to avoid potential problems in 
implementing community programs. This Process Manual shall contain the 
``lessons learned'' in establishing a safe community. The grantee shall 
submit the Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to the COTR 90 
days prior to the end of the performance period. The COTR will review 
each draft document and provide comments to the grantee within 30 days 
of receipt of the documents.
    ii. Final Report and Process Manual: The grantee shall revise the 
Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to reflect the COTR's 
comments. The revised documents shall be delivered to the COTR on or 
before the end of the performance period. The grantee shall supply the 
COTR one camera-ready copy, one computer disk copy in WordPerfect 
format, and four additional hard copies of each revised document.
    iii. Meetings and Briefings: The grantee shall plan for one to two 
briefings per year at NHTSA headquarters in Washington, D.C. with the 
COTR and other interested parties. The grantee shall also participate 
in one or two technology sharing/problem solving sessions with the 
NHTSA COTR, other interested parties and the other Safe Communities 
grantees per year in Washington, D.C. or some central location. In 
addition, the grantee shall plan for a presentation at one or more 
national meetings (e.g., APHA, Lifesavers . . .) per year.
    iv. Professional Journal Paper: The grantee shall prepare and 
submit at least one paper for publication in a professional journal if 
deemed appropriate by the COTR.
    3. During the effective performance period of cooperative 
agreements awarded as a result of this announcement, the agreement as 
applicable to the grantee, shall be subject to the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration's General Provisions for Assistance 
Agreements.

    Issued on: February 7, 1997.
James Hedlund,
Associate Administrator for Traffic Safety Programs.
[FR Doc. 97-3510 Filed 2-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M