[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61549-61551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30271]



[[Page 61549]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Office of Justice Programs


Bureau of Justice Statistics; Hate Crime Statistics Improvement 
Program

[OJP (BJS)-1144]
RIN 1121-ZA90
AGENCY: Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Office of Justice Programs 
(OJP), Justice.

ACTION: Solicitation for award of cooperative agreement.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to announce a public 
solicitation for services related to improving the accuracy and 
geographic coverage of hate crime statistics, developing trend data 
with regard to hate crime statistics and identifying ``best practices'' 
regarding the collection of hate crime statistics.

DATES: Proposals must be postmarked on or before December 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Proposals should be mailed to: Application Coordinator, 
Bureau of Justice Statistics, 810 7th Street, NW, Suite 2400, 
Washington, DC 20531, (202) 616-3500.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles R. Kindermann, Ph.D., Senior 
Statistician, Bureau of Justice Statistics, (202) 616-3489.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Crimes motivated by bias are devastating because of their impact on 
the victims and the polarizing effect that such crimes have on a 
community. Although many people believe that the hate crime problem is 
increasing, the statistical evidence for an increase is very weak. More 
specifically, the available statistical evidence understates the 
incidence of hate crime and does not provide valid indications of 
trends. Obtaining accurate information on the incidence of hate crime 
is crucial to understanding the full scope of the problem and 
effectively deploying resources to combat it.
    Currently, hate crime statistics are compiled by the Federal Bureau 
of Investigation (FBI) under the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, 
which itself relies on voluntarily reported data. Little more than half 
the nation's 16,000 UCR-participating law enforcement agencies report 
hate crime data, and a majority of those that do participate in the 
FBI's hate crime reporting program indicate that each year their 
jurisdiction experienced no hate crimes at all.
    There are four points at which failures in reporting can occur: 
victims reporting to their local law enforcement agencies, law 
enforcement officers recording the fact that the reported incident is a 
hate or bias crime, official determination that the reported crime was 
indeed bias-motivated, and transmitting the information from local law 
enforcement agencies to the FBI's UCR program. These factors complicate 
the Attorney General's efforts to publish a meaningful annual report on 
hate crimes under the Hate Crime Statistics Act (HCSA). While the HCSA 
does not specify any particular method of data collection, the Attorney 
General delegated the duty of collecting hate crime statistics to the 
Director of the FBI who, in turn, assigned this responsibility to the 
FBI's UCR program. The FBI assembles the information provided by state 
and local agencies and annually publishes a national hate crime 
statistics report which is available from the FBI in printed form on 
its website (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hatecm.htm).
    The FBI is gradually phasing in a replacement for the summary UCR 
program which is called the National Incident-Based Reporting System 
(NIBRS). Every incident reported in the NIBRS program allows for an 
indicator of whether or not it is a hate crime, so widespread 
implementation of NIBRS by law enforcement agencies is currently viewed 
as an important mechanism for enhancing hate crime reporting.
    Consistent with its role as the statistical arm of the Justice 
Department and its longstanding interest in hate crime statistics, the 
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is adding hate crime questions to 
the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to provide a national 
estimate of the overall extent of hate crimes. In addition, BJS has 
developed this solicitation to learn more about the impediments to 
local jurisdictions' participation in the collection of hate crime 
statistics and transmission of the statistics to the FBI for 
compilation at the national level. The work to be carried out under 
this solicitation will be closely coordinated with the FBI.

Objectives

    The purpose of this award is to develop and/or recommend 
methodologies and procedures that will improve the quality and accuracy 
of hate crime statistics, to improve the geographic coverage of hate 
crime statistics, and to recommend procedures that will result in 
reliable trend data. Profiles of jurisdictions that currently collect 
accurate hate crime statistics will be developed that will result in 
``best practices'' models.

Type of Assistance

    It is anticipated that assistance, in the form of one cooperative 
agreement of up to $100,000, will be awarded for a one-year period of 
study.

Statutory Authority

    The cooperative agreement to be awarded pursuant to this 
solicitation will be funded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics 
consistent with its mandate as set forth in 42 U.S.C. 3732.

Eligibility Requirements

    Consistent with fiscal requirements of the Department of Justice's 
Office of Justice Programs, both profit-making and nonprofit 
organizations may apply for funds. However, no fees may be charged 
against the project by profit-making organizations.

Scope of Work

    The object of this solicitation is to obtain a cost-effective 
research study that will assist the federal government in identifying 
activities to be undertaken in the future towards the goal of improving 
the accuracy and reporting of hate crime statistics, producing accurate 
trend data on hate crime, and developing ``best practices'' models.
    The applicant must specify a detailed timetable for each task 
involved in the project. The successful applicant's timetable will be 
reviewed by the BJS grant monitor; after agreement on a final 
timetable, all work must be completed as scheduled.
    The successful applicant must convene an advisory group comprised 
of representatives from a cross section of the community (to include a 
representative of victim advocates, victims, law enforcement agencies, 
government, business, education, legislators). This group will meet 
periodically throughout the course of the project to review progress, 
give advice, make recommendations for follow-up and implementation of 
research recommendations, and to review the final report. Both BJS and 
the FBI will provide key input to the selection of membership on the 
group. Staff work (including both administrative support for meetings, 
payment, and substantive drafting tasks) for the group will be provided 
by the recipient organization.
    In addition, the applicant must choose from the following tasks and 
propose activities to accomplish the tasks (not all listed tasks need 
be included in the application):
    1. Through the evaluation of current hate crimes training programs, 
recommend how they might be utilized

[[Page 61550]]

or modified to improve the accuracy, reliability, and geographic 
coverage of hate crime statistics.
    2. Evaluate the effectiveness of existing training curricula or 
materials that help law enforcement officers recognize and report hate 
or bias-motivated crimes, and produce a synthesized model incorporating 
the best features of them based on evaluations and other criteria 
stated in the proposal.
    3. Improve national estimates of the incidence, type, and trends of 
hate crimes, based on the UCR program as a model (data to be aggregated 
from law enforcement jurisdictions).
    4. Evaluate the impact of incident-based crime reporting systems 
(that include a check box or similar item for identifying each incident 
as bias-motivated or not) on the quality of hate crime statistics.
    5. Assess the status of hate crime reporting in a stratified sample 
of law enforcement agencies throughout the country (the strata could 
include the following: degree of urbanization, geographic region, size 
of agency, and hate crime reporting history). From this assessment:

--Discuss and recommend steps to be taken by law enforcement agencies 
to produce quality hate crime statistics.
--Identify effective ``screening'' and ``verification'' procedures for 
first identifying and then confirming the bias motivation.
--Determine factors associated with disparities in hate crime 
statistics reporting.
--Identify impediments to hate crime reporting at both the agency and 
the individual officer levels.

    6. Convene a focus group made up of representatives of groups 
vulnerable to hate crimes, relevant advocacy groups, and hate crime 
victims who did not report the crime to police, to ascertain methods of 
improving hate crime reporting.
    7. Examine the relationship between the characteristics of 
jurisdictions and agencies (population size, regional location, UCR 
crime rate, racial/ethnic mix, age distribution, median income, 
presence or absence of community policing, etc.) and the level of 
reporting of hate crime statistics.
    8. Assess the circumstances that led law enforcement agencies to 
develop effective hate crimes programs, such as whether there was a 
significant event, or other factors, that resulted in jurisdictions 
collecting accurate hate crime statistics; or in what ways was the 
adoption of such hate crime statistics collection methods related to 
instituting proactive efforts by the police to prevent hate crime?
    The recipient must produce a final report for submission to the 
Bureau of Justice Statistics which details the study, and suggests 
methods of improving the accuracy and geographic coverage of hate crime 
statistics, producing accurate trend data on hate crime, and developing 
``best practices'' models.

Suggested References

    Bishop, Eric and Jeff Slowikowski. ``Hate Crime.'' Fact Sheet 29. 
Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice. August, 1995.
    Bureau of Justice Assistance. ``A Policymaker's Guide to Hate 
Crimes.'' Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996.
    Community Relations Service. ``Hate Crime: The Violence of 
Intolerance.'' Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1997.
    Federal Bureau of Investigation. ``Hate Crime Data Collection 
Guidelines.'' Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996.
    Federal Bureau of Investigation. ``Training Guide for Hate Crime 
Data Collection.'' Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1997.
    Federal Bureau of Investigation. ``Hate Crime Statistics, 1995.'' 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996. ``Hate Crime 
Statistics Act of 1990,'' Pub. L. 100-275 (104 Stat. 140). 1990.
    Jacobs, James B. and Barry Eisler. ``The Hate Crime Statistics Act 
of 1990''; Criminal Law Bulletin. Warren Gorham and Lamont. Boston, 
Massachusetts. 1993, p. 99-123.
    Klanwatch, a Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center. ``The 
Dynamics of Youth, Hate and Violence.'' Klanwatch Intelligence Report. 
Montgomery, Alabama. October, 1995.
    Levin, Jack and Jack McDevitt. ``Hate Crimes: The Rising Tide of 
Bigotry and Bloodshed.'' New York. Plenum Press. 1993.
    Lieberman, Michael. ``Federal Action to Confront Hate Crimes: 
Preventing Violence and Improving Police Response.'' New Challenges: 
The Civil Rights Record of the Clinton Administration Mid-Term. 
Washington, D.C.: Citizens' Commission on Civil Rights. 1995. p. 217-
229.
    McLaughlin, Karen A. and Kelly J. Brilliant. ``Healing the Hate: A 
National Bias Crime Prevention Curriculum for Middle Schools.'' 
Washington, D.C.: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice. 1997.
    NGLTF Policy Institute. ``Anti-Gay and Lesbian Violence in 1994: 
National Trends, Analysis, and Incident Summaries.'' Washington, D.C. 
1991.
    Nolan, J. & Y. Akiyama. ``Assessing the Factors That Affect Law 
Enforcement Participation In Hate Crime Reporting.'' Washington, D.C.: 
Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1997.
    Office for Victims of Crime. ``National Bias Crimes Training for 
Law Enforcement and Victim Assistance Professionals: A Guide for 
Training Instructors.'' Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice. 
1995.

Award Procedures

    Proposals should describe in detail the procedures to be undertaken 
in furtherance of each of the activities described under Scope of Work. 
State by number (as listed above) which tasks are being included in the 
proposal and provide a brief (several paragraphs) introductory 
justification as to why these tasks were chosen in furtherance of the 
goals. Information on staffing levels and qualifications should be 
included for each task, and descriptions of experience relevant to the 
project should be included. Resumes of the proposed project director 
and key staff should be enclosed with the proposal.
    Applications will be reviewed competitively by a panel comprised of 
members selected by BJS. The panel will make recommendations to the 
Director of BJS. Final authority to enter into a cooperative agreement 
is reserved for the Director of BJS or his designee.
    Applications will be evaluated on the overall extent to which 
selected tasks, and the work performed on them, meet the objectives of 
the solicitation; respond to the priorities and technical complexities 
of the issue of hate crime reporting; specify work activities likely to 
produce useful results; conform to standards of high quality data 
analysis; and are fiscally feasible and efficient. Applicants will be 
evaluated on the basis of:

--Knowledge of issues related to hate crime data collection.
--Knowledge of issues related to the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) and 
the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
--Experience in organizing meetings of Federal, state, or local 
professionals related to criminal justice issues.
--Research expertise and experience in data gathering and report 
writing.
--Availability of qualified professional and support staff and suitable 
equipment for project activities.
--Demonstrated fiscal, management and organizational capability and 
experience suitable for providing

[[Page 61551]]

sound data within budget and time constraints.
--Reasonableness of estimated costs for the total project and for 
individual cost categories.

Application and Awards Process

    An original and two (2) copies of a full proposal must be submitted 
with SF 424 (Rev. 1988), ``Application for Federal Assistance,'' as the 
cover sheet. Proposals must be accompanied by a Budget Detail Worksheet 
(replaced the SF 424A, Budget Information); OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1-
93), Program Narrative and Assurances' OJP Form 4061/6, Certifications 
Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility 
Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements; and OJP Form 7120-1 
(Rev. 1-93), Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire 
(to be submitted by applicants who have not recently received Federal 
funds from the Office of Justice Programs and are not state or local 
units of government). If appropriate, applicants must complete and 
submit Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. All 
applicants must sign Certified Assurances that they are in compliance 
with the Federal laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in 
any program or activity the receives Federal funds. To obtain 
appropriate forms, contact Getha Hilario, BJS Management Assistant, at 
(202) 616-3500.
    The application should cover a one-year period with information 
provided for completion of the entire project. Proposals must include a 
program narrative, detailed budget, and budget narrative. The program 
narrative shall describe activities as stated in the scope of work and 
address the evaluation criteria. The detailed budget must provide costs 
including salaries of staff involved in the project and portion of 
those salaries to be paid from the award; fringe benefits paid to each 
staff person; travel costs, and supplies required to complete the 
project. The budget narrative closely follows the content of the 
detailed budget. The narrative should relate the items budgeted to the 
project activities and should provide a justification and explanation 
for the budgeted items. Refer to the aforementioned timetable when 
developing the program narrative and budget information.
    This award will not be used to procure equipment for the conduct of 
the study.

    Dated: November 13, 1997.
Jan M. Chaiken,
Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
[FR Doc. 97-30271 Filed 11-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P