[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10498-10502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4613]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation and 
the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation of the Administration 
for Children and Families; Notice Inviting Abstracts for Policy 
Research and Studies on Welfare Reform Outcomes for Fiscal Year 2000

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 
Department of Health and Human Services; Office of Planning, Research 
and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, Department of 
Health and Human Services.

ACTION: Announcement of the request for abstracts and the availability 
of funds for subsequent welfare reform policy research and studies.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation (ASPE) and the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation 
of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) invite abstracts 
for policy research and studies related to welfare reform.

CLOSING DATE: The closing date for submitting abstracts under this 
announcement is March 29, 2000. Only abstracts, not full proposals, 
will be accepted under this announcement.

MAILING ADDRESS: Abstracts should be submitted to: Adrienne Little, 
Grants Officer, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and 
Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Washington, DC 
20201, Telephone: (202) 690-8794. Administrative questions will be 
accepted and responded to up to ten working days prior to closing date 
of receipt of abstracts.
    The printed Federal Register notice is the only official program 
announcement. Any corrections to this announcement will be published in 
the Federal Register as well as published on the ASPE and ACF World 
Wide Web Pages. The web sites are http://aspe.hhs.gov/funding.htm and 
http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/opre/frpa.htm respectively. Although 
reasonable efforts are taken to assure that the files on the ASPE and 
ACF World Wide Web Pages containing electronic copies of this Program 
Announcement are accurate and complete, they are provided for 
information only. The applicant bears sole responsibility to assure 
that the copy downloaded and/or printed from any other source is 
accurate and complete.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administrative questions should be 
directed to the Grants Officer at the address or phone number listed 
above. Technical questions should be directed to Audrey Mirsky-Ashby, 
DHHS, ASPE, Telephone, 202-401-6640 or e-mail, [email protected] 
or Nancye Campbell, DHHS, ACF, 202-401-5760 or email, 
[email protected]. Written technical questions may also be faxed 
to Audrey Mirsky-Ashby at 202-690-6562 or may be addressed to Ms. 
Audrey Mirsky-Ashby at the following address, Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human 
Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW, Room 404E, Hubert H. Humphrey 
Building, Washington, DC 20201. Please call Ms. Audrey Mirsky-Ashby to 
confirm receipt. Technical questions will be accepted and responded to 
up to ten working days prior to the closing date of receipt of 
abstracts.

Part I. Supplementary Information

Legislative Authority

    This announcement is authorized by Section 1110 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1310) and awards will be made from funds 
appropriated under the Department of Health and Human Services 
Appropriations Act, 2000, as enacted by section 1000(a)(4) of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106-113).

Eligible Applicants

    Pursuant to section 1110 of the Social Security Act, any public 
organization, including state and local governments, and private 
nonprofit organizations, including universities and other institutions 
of higher education, may apply. Applications may also be submitted by 
private for-profit organizations. However, no grant funds may be paid 
as profit to grantees or subgrantees. i.e., any amount in excess of 
allowable direct and indirect costs of the recipient (45 CFR 74.81).

Available Funds

    ASPE and ACF are engaging in a two-part process. The first part of 
the process will be the submission of six page research abstracts. 
After the abstracts are reviewed, a subset of the applicants who 
submitted abstracts will be invited by either ASPE or ACF to submit 
full applications. These will be reviewed competitively. Financial

[[Page 10499]]

awards will be made only in the second part of the process; no awards 
will be made based on abstracts submitted. An invitation to submit an 
application is not a guarantee of funding. The following information on 
fund availability is provided for planning purposes for applicants.
    Approximately $2,250,000 in total is expected to be available from 
ASPE and ACF in funds appropriated for fiscal year 2000, and 
approximately $1 million from ACF in subsequent fiscal years, subject 
to the availability of funds. Of the fiscal year 2000 total, $1,000,000 
is expected to be available from ASPE and $1,250,000 is expected to be 
available from ACF. We estimate that this level of funding will support 
between 8 and 12 ASPE awards with total budgets ranging from $75,000 to 
$150,000 for most short-term policy analyses (to be completed within 
about 12 months of award) and between 5 and 8 ACF awards with total 
budgets from $75,000 to $500,000 for either short-term or longer-term 
projects. These figures are provided as guidance but do not constitute 
minimum or maximum limits. We expect that ASPE will fund primarily 
short-term projects and ACF will fund either type. If additional 
funding becomes available in fiscal years 2000 or 2001, a greater 
number of projects may be funded.
    No federal funds received as a result of this announcement can be 
used to purchase computer equipment and no funds may be paid as profit 
to grantees or subgrantees , i.e., any amount in excess of allowable 
direct and indirect costs of the recipient (45 CFR 74.81). Our intent 
is to sponsor research and analytic work and not to fund the provision 
of services. Grant funds awarded in the full-proposal phase of this 
initiative may not be used to pay for programs or services.
    Grantees must provide at least 5 percent of the total approved cost 
of the project. The total approved cost of the project is the sum of 
the Federal share and the non-Federal share. The non-Federal share may 
be met by cash or in-kind contributions, although applicants are 
encouraged to meet their match requirements through cash contributions. 
For example, a project requesting $200,000 in Federal funds must 
include a match of at least $10,527 (because $200,000 is 95% of 
$210,526).
    If a proposed project activity has approved funding support from 
other funding sources, the amount, duration, purpose, and source of the 
funds should be indicated in materials submitted under this 
announcement. If completion of the proposed project activity is 
contingent upon approval of funding from other sources, the 
relationship between the funds being sought elsewhere and from ASPE/ACF 
should be discussed in the budget information submitted as a part of 
the abstract. In both cases, the contribution that ASPE/ACF funds will 
make to the project should be clearly presented.
    If data collection is part of the project and if federal funding 
support is used for the data collection, the researcher will make the 
data available for use by other researchers. Awards that include 
support for data collection will likely include requirements for the 
data to be made available to the public (e.g., public use data files or 
restricted access files).

Background

    The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) brought about fundamental changes 
in our nation's income support program for needy families and children. 
Welfare reform was expected to alter behavior in regard to work, 
marriage, fertility and program participation under the Temporary 
Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) block grant program. Under TANF, 
states were given considerable flexibility to design and implement 
their support programs for needy families with children. PRWORA 
authorized TANF through 2002.
    Between January 1993 and June 1999, the number of people receiving 
cash assistance under the prior Aid to Families with Dependent Children 
(AFDC) program or the new TANF program fell from 14.1 million to under 
7 million recipients, a reduction of 51 percent. This decline has 
occurred partly in response to the strong economy, the Administration's 
granting of Federal waivers to support welfare reform initiatives in 43 
States prior to passage of PRWORA, and the state implementation of 
provisions of the PRWORA itself. In response to the need for government 
officials and others to better understand the policy and programmatic 
changes that have been made, the effects on families and children, and 
the implications for other organizations and programs, DHHS and others 
have sponsored and carried out a broad array of welfare reform research 
and evaluations.
    Studies in progress address a broad set of questions and have and 
will continue to produce valuable information. However, while we are 
learning a good deal in some areas there is more we need to know. For 
example, additional research and analyses are needed on children and 
family poverty status, labor supply decisions, program participation 
pattern decisions, family formation and structure, outcomes for 
children, outcomes for different sub-populations, and the effects of 
different reform policies and administrative approaches. Further, more 
information is needed to better understand the interaction of welfare 
reform with and its implications for other programs such as Medicaid, 
Food Stamps, child care, child support, foster care, or child welfare, 
for example, and for other community services (e.g., emergency food, 
housing, employment, training, education, mental health, substance 
abuse treatment). While some families are benefiting from the new 
incentives, requirements and opportunities, others may be left behind. 
In response, many state and local governments and organizations have 
begun to design and implement new strategies to work with families with 
multiple challenges that interfere with obtaining or sustaining 
employment at levels that can meet family needs. Little is known about 
the effectiveness of these strategies.
    This announcement is one part of the Department of Health and Human 
Services' strategy to support research that will address critically 
important questions about welfare reform and related programs serving 
low-income families and outcomes for mothers, fathers, children, and 
other family members. Congress explicitly authorized funds to carry out 
such research in the Health and Human Services Appropriation Act of 
2000. Sound research and analyses on an array of important issues and 
topics will be needed to help inform the debate and deliberations on 
TANF reauthorization at the national level. Information is needed to 
provide information and guidance to state and local governing officials 
as they continue to reform and refine their policies, programs, and 
approaches. Further research and analyses are needed to inform us about 
the experiences of families during these times and their prospects for 
the future and about the experiences of organizations who are working 
with families to help them succeed and thrive.

Part II. Purpose

    The purpose of these studies is to support policy-relevant 
research, using rigorous analytical methods, to address critical 
questions about welfare reform related outcomes for families and 
children, program design, implementation and management choices and 
effects at various levels. We are particularly interested in welfare 
outcomes and those issues that are likely to be of concern in TANF 
reauthorization discussions. We will

[[Page 10500]]

support short-term research and data analysis that are designed to be 
completed within about twelve months as well as some longer-term 
studies that may require multiple years. Our intent is to sponsor 
research and analytic work and not to fund the provision of services. 
Grant funds awarded in the full-proposal phase of this initiative may 
not be used to pay for programs or services.
    ASPE and ACF are interested in analyses that would inform the 
general issues discussed above and the questions listed below. We are 
interested in the effect of welfare reform on families and children, 
the effects of state policies and practices, and other issues related 
to low-income families with children. Data from a variety of sources 
can be used (such as state and county administrative records or survey 
data). We also encourage the use of national surveys (e.g., PSID, NLSY-
79, NLSY-97, SIPP, SPD) and comprehensive state level administrative 
and survey databases which will allow for detailed analytic work on the 
causes, consequences and processes of welfare reform and the broader 
policy and economic environment. (Note: While there are positive 
aspects to the use of national surveys, researchers must be prepared to 
address the limitation that most data will be based on periods that 
precede passage of the welfare reform legislation or implementation of 
its major provisions.) We expect that most short-term projects will 
rely on secondary data analyses. However, primary data collection and 
analyses may be necessary for some projects.
    While the list represents many of the topics that are important to 
ASPE and ACF, the suggested questions are by no means meant to be 
exhaustive or restrictive. ASPE and ACF invite researchers to submit 
abstracts for analytic work in other areas related to welfare outcomes 
that they deem to be important.
    1. Composition of Caseload. Is the cash assistance caseload 
becoming more disadvantaged? In what ways are the families who remain 
on welfare different than the ones who have left? What are the 
characteristics of those who are working and still receiving TANF? Are 
there differences within this group in work patterns, TANF use, or 
individual or family and child characteristics? What role do policy 
decisions (e.g., disregards, sanctions, time limits, working with 
``harder-to-serve'' families) play in the variation in caseloads across 
states? What are the characteristics of those with little or no work 
experience? What are the interactions between low-wage work and state 
policies related to earnings disregards and time limits and what are 
the implications for families? In addition to increased numbers of 
child only cases, are there other changes in the composition of the 
TANF caseload? What are the implications for applicants and recipients 
of such changes? What are the implications for the TANF program or 
related programs?
    2. Patterns of use of government programs. What are the relative 
roles of entry and exit effects in caseload decline? How are families 
(working and non-working) utilizing government sponsored programs 
including cash assistance, Medicaid, food stamps, child care, child 
support, SSI, EITC, Unemployment Insurance, workforce development 
programs, and other support service benefits? Are there differences in 
the patterns of use across programs among low-income working families, 
including current and former TANF families and non-welfare families? 
Have patterns changed? What are the major factors contributing to any 
change in patterns of use? Are there differences in the characteristics 
of families with different patterns of program utilization? Are the 
current utilization patterns affecting other safety-net programs (e.g., 
foster care, child welfare, housing programs, substance abuse 
treatment)? What factors affect changes seen by other safety net 
programs (e.g., early identification and referral by TANF agency, 
increased investments using TANF funds or other sources, families 
leaving TANF)? What is known about the usage patterns for the non-
resident parent? To what extent do alternative state/local policies and 
practices affect utilization (e.g., ``make work pay'' policies, levels 
of subsidy for child care, adjusted hours of operation for working 
families, outreach or marketing activities for health care, child care, 
or other benefits, level of training, extent of collaboration)?
    3. Effects on sub-populations. What are the effects of welfare 
reform on those in different geographic settings (e.g., urban centers, 
rural communities, tribal reservations)? What are the effects of 
welfare reform and related program changes on different groups of 
individuals or families (e.g., teen parents, immigrants, ethnic or 
racial groups, families with infants and toddlers, those with mental or 
physical health problems, those with low basic skill levels or limited 
English proficiency, Native Americans, or those living in different 
types of family or household compositions)? What are the effects on the 
broader population of low-income families who are not participating in 
TANF or other needs-based assistance? To what extent do alternative 
state/local TANF policies and practices affect outcomes for different 
groups?
    4. Non-working welfare leavers. What are the characteristics and 
circumstances of people who leave welfare and are not working? What are 
the circumstances of their children? What are the reasons that some 
families do not reenter the welfare system? To what extent does their 
employment or welfare status change over time? What are their sources 
of income, income levels and living arrangements? What kinds of support 
do they receive from the non-resident parent? Do these or other 
circumstances change over time? What public, family or community 
resources do they use and over what periods?
    5. Sanctions. How effective are full-family sanctions versus 
partial sanctions or alternative conciliation policies and practices in 
obtaining compliance with work requirements? What is the level of 
employment among adults in fully sanctioned cases? Do sanctioned cases 
use other sources of public support more than other families? What are 
the effects of TANF sanctions on household income and circumstances? 
What are the reasons for continued noncompliance among sanctioned 
families? Are sanctioned families more likely to be involved with child 
welfare or foster care programs? Are there differences among 
continuously sanctioned cases and others in the extent or presence of 
problems such as substance abuse, mental health problems, domestic 
violence, or very low basic skills?
    6. Labor market experiences. To what extent do TANF recipients and 
former recipients who work differ from other low-income working 
families or individuals without children? Specifically, how do they 
differ from each other with regard to outcomes such as earnings, 
increases in wage rates, average hours of work per week, types of work, 
benefits available, length of employment spells, number of jobs, use of 
TANF/Medicaid/SCHIP/Food Stamps and EITC, child care arrangements, 
costs and subsidies, asset accumulation, living arrangements, and 
marriage? To what extent do they differ with regard to individual, 
family or other characteristics (e.g., education, skill level, family 
composition, health status, family supports)? Are certain 
characteristics associated with better outcomes? Are TANF (and related 
programs') policies, components, or features associated with better 
outcomes

[[Page 10501]]

for families and children? What role do workforce development programs 
play?
    7. Employment Stability. What factors (e.g., individual, family, 
geographic, public policy) contribute to employment stability among 
low-income workers (families and individuals without children), 
including current and former TANF recipients? To what extent is 
employment stability affected by child care arrangements, options, or 
costs? Does employment stability lead to better circumstances for 
adults or children (e.g., wage advancement, jobs with better benefits, 
increased earnings, increased household income, housing stability or 
quality, types of child care used, stability of family routines, school 
outcomes for children, regular receipt of child support)?
    8. The potential importance of marriage and family structure with 
respect to family well-being. To what extent does marriage improve the 
economic well-being of low-income families? How do the economic 
benefits of marriage differ by demographic characteristics including 
socioeconomic status and ethnicity? Among the low-income population, 
how does the economic well-being of married families compare to that of 
families entering other unions such as cohabitation, and what might be 
the reason for those differences? To what extent do the relative 
benefits depend on the sequencing of events such as pregnancy, birth, 
cohabitation, marriage, and union dissolution? In addition to potential 
economic benefits, does marriage among the low-income population also 
have positive impacts on adult and child behaviors, as compared to 
behaviors among single parent or cohabiting families? To what extent 
are outcomes among married individuals representative of the potential 
benefits to marriage among nonmarried individuals, and how can these 
outcomes be modeled in a way that better controls the selective factors 
affecting people's decisions to marry or not.
    9. TANF flexibility and implications for other programs. To what 
extent has TANF flexibility resulted in changes in types of families 
served (e.g., working-poor families not/never on cash assistance) and 
the types of programs or services funded? Has the flexibility within 
TANF affected the extent or manner of interaction (e.g., policy 
development, funding decisions, staffing, formal/informal 
collaboration, referrals) with other programs such as child care, child 
support, Medicaid, SCHIP, food stamps, SSI, or workforce development 
programs or types of providers (e.g., private, non-profit, faith-
based)? What is the effect of changes in interaction on participants or 
on agencies involved? Has TANF flexibility or other aspects of welfare 
reform affected participation in other programs given the availability 
of similar benefits under TANF and other programs (e.g., foster care)? 
To what extent have state/local decisions to utilize TANF flexibility 
affected the number of cases reported in other systems such as foster 
care?
    10. Use of TANF and Maintenance of Effort (MOE) funds. How has TANF 
affected the total level of funding available for programs for low-
income families? How are state and local governments utilizing the 
flexibility provided under TANF in deciding how to allocate and spend 
welfare funds (TANF and MOE funds)? What role do TANF and MOE funding 
levels play in state/local decision making with regard to services for 
low-income families and children? To what extent is there diversity in 
the types of organizations administering TANF funds or TANF-funded 
program activities and has this changed over time? What are the 
implications of this diversity (e.g., for program accountability, 
public awareness, uses of cash assistance block grant funds)?
    11. Barrier identification and service utilization. To what extent 
are individuals who are identified as having barriers to employment 
(e.g., substance abuse, mental illness or mental health problems, very 
low basic skills, learning disabilities, physical disabilities, or 
violent relationships) referred to appropriate services? To what extent 
are those referred enrolled or engaged in services to address the 
barrier? To what extent do participants complete or continue to engage 
in the services or treatment? Does participation in treatment/services 
affect compliance with TANF requirements, employment and other outcomes 
for parents and other caregivers? To what extent has TANF funding 
flexibility and state/local policies and practices affected access to 
needed services or the ability of ``harder-to-employ'' individuals to 
make progress toward employment and reduced use of TANF?
    12. Entry effects and welfare dynamics. How do entrants to TANF 
differ from entrants to AFDC, especially in regard to family and child 
characteristics (e.g., age, number of children)? How can entries into 
TANF and AFDC be modeled, and what do such modeling efforts tell us 
about the effect of TANF policies on entries to TANF and diversion from 
entries? What events are associated with the beginning and ending of 
TANF spells? How have they changed over time in response to the economy 
and policy changes? How do these compare to beginning and ending AFDC 
spells? How does spell lengths for TANF entrants compare with spell 
lengths for AFDC entrants? What are the effects of time limits? What 
are the characteristics of those likely to hit the federal time limits?

Part III. Abstract Application Guidelines and Evaluation Criteria

    As noted previously, ASPE and ACF are engaging in a two-part 
process. Applicants must first submit an abstract as described in the 
application section below. Please read this section carefully. 
Abstracts must comply with the application guidelines. Abstracts that 
do not comply with the application guidelines will not be considered.
    Abstracts must be received in the following format:

12 point font size;
Single spaced;
1 inch top, bottom, left, and right margins

    The deadline for receipt of abstracts is March 29, 2000. An 
abstract will be considered as having met the deadline if it is either 
received at, or hand-delivered to, the mailing address on or before 
March 29, 2000, or postmarked before midnight three days prior to March 
29, 2000 and received in time to be considered during the competitive 
review process (within two weeks of the deadline).
    Hand-delivered applications will be accepted Monday through Friday, 
excluding Federal holidays, during the working hours of 9:00 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m. in the lobby of the Hubert H. Humphrey building, located at 
200 Independence Avenue, SW in Washington, DC. When hand-delivering an 
application, call (202) 690-8794 from the lobby for pick up. A staff 
person will be available to receive applications.
    An original and two copies are required, but applicants are 
encouraged to send an additional 4 copies to ease processing, but 
applicants will not be penalized if these extra copies are not 
included. The original and copies of the abstract must be mailed to: 
Adrienne Little, Grants Officer, Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 
Independence Avenue, SW, Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 
Washington, DC. 20201, Telephone: (202) 690-8794.
    Abstracts must include the material indicated below. The 
information provided for items 1 through 4 must not exceed 6 pages.
    1. Title page. This page should include a reference to this program

[[Page 10502]]

announcement: Policy Research and Studies on Welfare Reform Outcomes; 
proposed project title; name of researcher(s); organizational 
affiliation; and the address, telephone number, and e-mail address of 
the lead investigator. (This will be the mailing address used by ASPE/
ACF to request full proposals from selected applicants.) The title page 
must include an indication, by number, of the research question(s) 
presented within this announcement that are being addressed or indicate 
that the research question is not one of those contained in the 
announcement. The proposed data set must also be included. The title 
page must include the total number of months needed for completion of 
the project and the project's proposed start and end date. This should 
be the only information on page one.
    2. Statement of research question. The statement should briefly 
discuss the relevance of the proposed work to the purposes of this 
announcement. The statement will be reviewed for policy relevance and 
the importance of the research question. Please indicate, by number, 
which research question(s) presented within this announcement are being 
addressed or indicate that the research question is not one of those 
contained in the announcement.
    3. Statement of proposed methods. This section should describe the 
conceptual model, the data source and the analytic methods. This 
description should explicitly relate data sources and analytic methods 
to the research issues to be addressed. This section must also contain 
information regarding the researcher's ability to obtain the data and 
information on when data will be available, if they are not already. 
Note that in the final proposal the researcher will have to provide 
assurances that the data is available.
    4. Experience. The principal investigator's relevant research 
experience must be described. Other key staff must be identified with a 
brief description of their relevant experience and an indication of the 
tasks or activities for which they will be primarily responsible.
    5. Estimated budget. This section must include an estimate of staff 
time and other direct costs. Information about other funding sources 
and the contribution that the ASPE/ACF funds will make must be 
discussed. Only a total project budget need be submitted at this time.

Part IV. The Review Process

    An independent review panel will review and score all abstracts 
that are submitted by the deadline date and which meet the screening 
criteria (all information and in formats required by this 
announcement). The panel will review the abstracts using the evaluation 
criteria listed below to score each abstract. The review results will 
be the primary elements used by the Assistant Secretary for Planning 
and Evaluation and the Assistant Secretary for Children and Families in 
making decisions regarding full application submission. The Department 
also reserves the option to discuss abstracts with other Federal or 
State staff, specialists, experts, and the general public. Comments 
from these sources, along with those of the reviewers, will be kept 
from inappropriate disclosure and may be considered in determining 
which applicants will be requested to submit a competitive application 
for review.
    1. Research Question(s): The research must address important 
unanswered questions of local or national policy significance. The 
proposed research must contribute significantly to understanding the 
outcomes of welfare reform. Short-term research studies should provide 
information likely to be relevant to TANF reauthorization discussions. 
(35 points)
    2. Methodology/Merits of the Research Design: The research design 
must identify the study population, indicate data sources and 
demonstrate the availability and reliability of proposed data sources 
and the appropriateness and reliability of data collection instruments 
or observational techniques as well as the validity of analytic methods 
proposed for addressing the research questions and hypotheses. The 
conceptual model and the analysis plan must be clearly explained. It is 
important to explain the time frame for the proposed work and that 
explanation must be clear and reasonable. (25 points)
    3. Experience. The abstract must provide information on the 
principal investigator's relevant research experience and demonstrate 
capability to use the proposed data and methods. The relevant 
experience and proposed roles of other key staff must be presented. (30 
points)
    4. Budget. Applicants must provide an estimate of the total 
proposed budget, including information about other funding sources. The 
contribution of ASPE/ACF funding must be presented. The budget must be 
reasonable for the proposed scope of work. (10 points)

Estimate of Schedule

    ASPE and ACF anticipate that abstracts will be reviewed and 
selected applicants notified to submit full proposals approximately 30 
days following the deadline for submission of abstracts. We expect that 
full proposals will be required to be submitted within 45 days of the 
date of the notification letter.
    The Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers are 93.239 and 
93.647 for ASPE and ACF, respectively.

    Dated: February 18, 2000.
Margaret A. Hamburg,
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.

    Dated: February 16, 2000.
Howard Rolsto,
Director, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration 
for Children and Families .
[FR Doc. 00-4613 Filed 2-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4151-04-P