[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 208 (Friday, October 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63140-63174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8837]



[[Page 63139]]

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

Part III





State Justice Institute





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



Grant Guideline; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 208 / Friday, October 27, 2006 / 
Notices  

[[Page 63140]]


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

STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE


Grant Guideline

AGENCY: State Justice Institute.

ACTION: Final Grant Guideline.

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

SUMMARY: This Guideline sets forth the administrative, programmatic, 
and financial requirements attendant to Fiscal Year 2007 State Justice 
Institute grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts.

DATES: October 27, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Linskey, Executive Director, 
State Justice Institute, 1650 King St. (Suite 600), Alexandria, VA 
22314, (703) 684-6100 X201, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the State Justice Institute Act 
of 1984, 42 U.S.C. 10701, et seq., as amended, the Institute is 
authorized to award grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts to 
State and local courts, nonprofit organizations, and others for the 
purpose of improving the quality of justice in the State courts of the 
United States.
    Pending appropriations legislation passed by the House (H.R. 5672) 
would appropriate $2,000,000 for SJI in fiscal year (FY) 2007; the 
Senate-passed version of the bill proposes to appropriate $4,500,000.
    Regardless of the final amount provided to SJI for FY 2007, the 
Institute's Board of Directors intends to solicit grant applications 
across the range of grant programs available.
    The following Grant Guideline is adopted by the State Justice 
Institute for FY 2007:

Table of Contents

I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute
II. Eligibility for Award
III. Scope of the Program
IV. Applications
V. Application Review Procedures
VI. Compliance Requirements
VII. Financial Requirements
VIII. Grant Adjustments
Appendix A SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts
Appendix B Grant Application Forms (Forms A, B, C, D, and Disclosure 
of Lobbying Activities)
Appendix C Line-Item Budget Form (Form E)
Appendix D Scholarship Application Forms (Forms S1 and S2)

I. The Mission of the State Justice Institute

    The Institute was established by Public Law 98-620 to improve the 
administration of justice in the State courts of the United States. 
Incorporated in the State of Virginia as a private, nonprofit 
corporation, the Institute is charged, by statute, with the 
responsibility to:
     Direct a national program of financial assistance designed 
to assure that each citizen of the United States is provided ready 
access to a fair and effective system of justice;
     Foster coordination and cooperation with the Federal 
judiciary;
     Promote recognition of the importance of the separation of 
powers doctrine to an independent judiciary; and
     Encourage education for judges and support personnel of 
State court systems through national and State organizations, including 
universities.
    To accomplish these broad objectives, the Institute is authorized 
to provide funds to State courts, national organizations which support 
and are supported by State courts, national judicial education 
organizations, and other organizations that can assist in improving the 
quality of justice in the State courts.
    The Institute is supervised by a Board of Directors appointed by 
the President, with the consent of the Senate. The Board is statutorily 
composed of six judges; a State court administrator; and four members 
of the public, no more than two of whom can be of the same political 
party.
    Through the award of grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements, 
the Institute is authorized to perform the following activities:
    A. Support research, demonstrations, special projects, technical 
assistance, and training to improve the administration of justice in 
the State courts;
    B. Provide for the preparation, publication, and dissemination of 
information regarding State judicial systems;
    C. Participate in joint projects with Federal agencies and other 
private grantors;
    D. Evaluate or provide for the evaluation of programs and projects 
to determine their impact upon the quality of criminal, civil, and 
juvenile justice and the extent to which they have contributed to 
improving the quality of justice in the State courts;
    E. Encourage and assist in furthering judicial education; and,
    F. Encourage, assist, and serve in a consulting capacity to State 
and local justice system agencies in the development, maintenance, and 
coordination of criminal, civil, and juvenile justice programs and 
services.

II. Eligibility for Award

    The Institute is authorized by Congress to award grants, 
cooperative agreements, and contracts to the following entities and 
types of organizations:
    A. State and local courts and their agencies (42 U.S.C. 
10705(b)(1)(A)).
    B. National nonprofit organizations controlled by, operating in 
conjunction with, and serving the judicial branches of State 
governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(B)).
    C. National nonprofit organizations for the education and training 
of judges and support personnel of the judicial branch of State 
governments (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(1)(C)). An applicant is considered a 
national education and training applicant under section 10705(b)(1)(C) 
if:
    1. The principal purpose or activity of the applicant is to provide 
education and training to State and local judges and court personnel; 
and
    2. The applicant demonstrates a record of substantial experience in 
the field of judicial education and training.
    D. Other eligible grant recipients (42 U.S.C. 10705 (b)(2)(A)-(D)).
    1. Provided that the objectives of the project can be served 
better, the Institute is also authorized to make awards to:
    a. Nonprofit organizations with expertise in judicial 
administration;
    b. Institutions of higher education;
    c. Individuals, partnerships, firms, corporations (for-profit 
organizations must waive their fees); and
    d. Private agencies with expertise in judicial administration.
    2. The Institute may also make awards to State or local agencies 
and institutions other than courts for services that cannot be 
adequately provided through nongovernmental arrangements (42 U.S.C. 
10705(b)(3)).
    E. Inter-agency Agreements. The Institute may enter into inter-
agency agreements with Federal agencies (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)) and 
private funders to support projects consistent with the purposes of the 
State Justice Institute Act.

III. Scope of the Program

    SJI is offering five types of grants in FY 2007: Project Grants, 
Technical Assistance (TA) Grants, Curriculum Adaptation and Training 
(CAT) Grants, Scholarships, and Partner Grants. Effective immediately, 
SJI will no longer award Continuation Grants to extend previous or 
future Project or Partner Grants.

A. Project Grants

    Project Grants are intended to support innovative education and 
training, research and evaluation, demonstration, and technical 
assistance projects that can improve the administration of

[[Page 63141]]

justice in State courts locally or nationwide. Project Grants may 
ordinarily not exceed $300,000. Grant periods for Project Grants 
ordinarily may not exceed 36 months. No Continuation Grants will be 
awarded.
    Applicants for Project Grants will be required to contribute a cash 
match of not less than 50% of the total cost of the proposed project. 
In other words, grant awards by SJI must be matched at least dollar for 
dollar by grant applicants. Applicants may contribute the required cash 
match directly or in cooperation with third parties.
    Prospective applicants should carefully review Section VI.8. 
(matching requirements) and Section VI.16.a. (non-supplantation) of the 
guidelines prior to beginning the application process. If questions 
arise, applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with the 
Institute.
    As set forth in Section I., the Institute is authorized to fund 
projects addressing a broad range of program areas. Though the Board is 
likely to favor Project Grant applications focused on the Special 
Interest program categories described below, potential applicants are 
also encouraged to bring to the attention of the Institute innovative 
projects outside those categories. Funds will not be made available for 
the ordinary, routine operation of court systems or programs in any of 
these areas.
1. Special Interest Program Categories
    The Institute is interested in funding both innovative programs and 
programs of proven merit that can be replicated in other jurisdictions. 
The Institute is especially interested in funding projects that:
     Formulate new procedures and techniques, or creatively 
enhance existing procedures and techniques;
     Address aspects of the State judicial systems that are in 
special need of serious attention;
     Have national significance by developing products, 
services, and techniques that may be used in other States; and
     Create and disseminate products that effectively transfer 
the information and ideas developed to relevant audiences in State and 
local judicial systems, or provide technical assistance to facilitate 
the adaptation of effective programs and procedures in other State and 
local jurisdictions.
    A project will be identified as a Special Interest project if it 
meets the four criteria set forth above and it falls within the scope 
of the Board-designated Special Interest program categories listed 
below.
    The order of listing does not imply any ordering of priorities 
among the categories.
    a. Court Budgeting. Unlike the legislative and executive branches, 
the judiciary seems to weather regular periods of budgetary feast and 
famine. This has proven very disruptive to court staffing, services, 
technology investment, and professional education and development. The 
Institute is interested in pursuing ``how to'' projects that focus on 
``best practices'' regarding budget structure and formulation, sources 
of revenue, inter-branch relations, and other methods that contribute 
to stabilizing court budgets and improving their long-term financial 
prospects.
    b. Courts and the Media. Recent repeated public attacks on courts 
have gone largely unanswered, because judges were unwilling and/or 
courts were unable to respond effectively. No one is better prepared 
than a judge to describe decision-making on the bench within the law 
and the Constitution. The Institute is interested in projects that 
explore the role of judge as public commentator within ethical and 
professional bounds. The Institute is also interested in judicial 
education or other programs that prepare judges and court officials to 
serve as spokesmen in short notice, high profile circumstances, 
especially in situations where courts lack dedicated press secretaries. 
Finally, the Institute is interested in promoting initiatives that 
improve relations between the judiciary and the media, since much of 
the recent rancor between the two seems based on unfamiliarity with one 
another's duties, responsibilities, and limitations. In particular, the 
Institute is interested in proposals that focus on cultivating trust 
and open communication between the Third Branch and the Fourth Estate 
on a day-to-day basis, because dialogue between strangers is rarely 
started and never sustained in a crisis.
    c. Elder Issues. This category includes research, demonstration, 
evaluation, and education projects designed to improve management of 
guardianship, probate, fraud, Americans with Disability Act, and other 
types of elder-related cases. The Institute is particularly interested 
in projects that would develop and evaluate judicial branch education 
programs addressing elder law and related issues.
    d. Performance Standards and Outcome Measures. This category 
includes projects that will develop and measure performance standards 
and outcomes for all aspects of court operations. The Institute is 
particularly interested in projects that take the National Center for 
State Courts' ``CourTools'' to the next level. Other initiatives 
designed to further professionalize court staff and operations, or to 
objectively evaluate the costs and benefits and cost-effectiveness of 
problem solving courts, are also welcome.
    e. Defending the Institution. The perils facing courts today 
include attacks on our system of justice and judges and catastrophes 
natural and manmade. The Institute is seeking proposals to address 
each.
    Attacks on courts and judges have increased. These attacks are 
often not scrutinized because many citizens in this country lack 
education or knowledge about the role of the courts in our system of 
government. The Institute remains interested in supporting the creation 
of public education projects that would develop and test materials that 
judges and court leaders can use to inform community groups and 
constituencies about the nature and importance of federalism, 
separation and balance of powers, and judicial independence. In 
addition, as mentioned above, projects that would improve the 
relationship between courts and the media are encouraged.
    Catastrophes, natural and manmade, can destroy the ability of our 
courts to help provide law and order. The Board is interested in: (1) 
Continuity of operations proposals that go beyond planning and table 
top exercises to include ``no notice'' drills and ``red team'' 
exercises involving all personnel integral to court operations, 
including those from outside agencies such as sheriffs' offices, (2) 
innovative and secure court security information-sharing projects that 
piggyback on, or otherwise exploit, existing capabilities and 
technologies (because new resources for new systems are apt to be 
limited), and (3) piloting a low cost ``virtual'' 24/7 threat center 
(replacing costly ``bricks and mortar'' proposals) netting Federal, 
State, and local court security first responders with analysts 
conducting real-time threat assessments.
    Though ``Managing Self-Represented Litigation'', ``Application of 
Technology in the Courts'', and ``Children and Families in Court'' are 
no longer listed as Special Interest program categories, the SJI Board 
retains a keen interest in these areas and would welcome ground 
breaking proposals in all three.
    Project Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.A.

B. Technical Assistance (TA) Grants

    TA Grants are intended to provide State or local courts, 
particularly small, rural, or impoverished urban courts or

[[Page 63142]]

regional court associations, with sufficient support to obtain expert 
assistance to diagnose a problem, develop a response to that problem, 
and implement any needed changes. TA Grants may not exceed $30,000, and 
shall only cover the cost of obtaining the services of expert 
consultants. Examples of expenses not covered by TA Grants include the 
salaries, benefits, travel, or training costs of full-or part-time 
court employees. Grant periods for TA Grants ordinarily may not exceed 
24 months. In calculating project duration, applicants are cautioned to 
fully consider the time required to issue a request for proposals, 
negotiate a contract with the selected provider, and execute the 
project. The SJI Board intends to reserve up to $250,000 for TA Grants. 
Sufficient funds will be reserved each quarter to assure the 
availability of TA Grants throughout the year.
    Applicants for TA Grants will be required to contribute a match of 
not less than 50% of the grant amount requested, of which 20% must be 
cash. In other words, a grantee seeking a $30,000 TA grant must provide 
a $15,000 match, of which up to $12,000 can be in-kind and not less 
than $3,000 must be cash. Applicants considering cash matches well in 
excess of $3,000 should consider applying for Project Grants and are 
strongly urged to consult with the Institute prior to applying.
    TA Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.B.

C. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants

    CAT Grants are intended to: (1) Enable courts and regional or 
national court associations to modify and adapt model curricula, course 
modules, or conference programs to meet States' or local jurisdictions' 
educational needs; train instructors to present portions or all of the 
curricula; and pilot-test them to determine their appropriateness, 
quality, and effectiveness, or (2) conduct judicial branch education 
and training programs, led by either expert or in-house personnel, 
designed to prepare judges and court personnel for innovations, 
reforms, and/or new technologies recently adopted by grantee courts. 
CAT Grants may not exceed $20,000. Grant periods for CAT Grants 
ordinarily may not exceed 12 months. The SJI Board intends to reserve 
up to $100,000 for CAT Grants.
    Applicants for CAT Grants will be required to contribute a match of 
not less than 50% of the grant amount requested, of which 20% must be 
cash. In other words, a grantee seeking a $20,000 CAT grant must 
provide a $10,000 match, of which up to $8,000 can be in-kind and not 
less than $2,000 must be cash. Applicants considering cash matches well 
in excess of $2,000 should consider applying for Project Grants and are 
strongly urged to consult with the Institute prior to applying.
    CAT Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.C.

D. Scholarships for Judges and Court Managers

    Scholarships are intended to enhance the skills, knowledge, and 
abilities of State court judges and court managers by enabling them to 
attend out-of-State, or to enroll in online, educational and training 
programs sponsored by national and State providers that they could not 
otherwise attend or take online because of limited State, local, and 
personal budgets. Scholarships may not exceed $1,500. The SJI Board 
intends to reserve up to $250,000 for scholarships. Sufficient funds 
will be reserved each quarter to assure the availability of 
scholarships throughout the year.
    Scholarship application procedures can be found in section IV.D.

E. Partner Grants

    Partner Grants are intended to allow SJI and Federal, State, or 
local agencies or foundations, trusts, or other private entities to 
combine financial resources in pursuit of common interests. Though 
many, if not most, Partner Grants will fall under the Special Interest 
program categories cited in section III.A., proposals addressing other 
emerging or high priority court-related problems will be considered on 
a case-by-case basis. SJI and its financial partners may set any level 
for Partner Grants, subject to the entire amount of the grant being 
available at the time of the award; applicants for Partner Grants may 
request any amount of funding. Grant periods for Partner Grants 
ordinarily may not exceed 36 months. Absent extraordinary 
circumstances, no grant will continue for more than five years.
    Partner Grants are subject to the same cash match requirement as 
Project Grants. In other words, grant awards by SJI must be matched at 
least dollar for dollar. Applicants may contribute the required cash 
match directly or in cooperation with third parties. A Federal third 
party may contribute up to 49% of the total cost of a project, but only 
to purchase a service. A Federal third party's contribution cannot be 
used as a grantee's match.
    Partner Grant application procedures can be found in section IV.E.

IV. Applications

A. Project Grants

    An application for a Project Grant must include an application 
form; budget forms (with appropriate documentation); a project abstract 
and program narrative; a disclosure of lobbying form, when applicable; 
and certain certifications and assurances (see below). See Appendix B 
for the Project Grant application forms. For a summary of the 
application process, visit the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-Line Tutorials, then Project 
Grant.
1. Forms
    a.  Application Form (Form A). The application form requests basic 
information regarding the proposed project, the applicant, and the 
total amount of funding requested from the Institute. It also requires 
the signature of an individual authorized to certify on behalf of the 
applicant that the information contained in the application is true and 
complete; that submission of the application has been authorized by the 
applicant; and that if funding for the proposed project is approved, 
the applicant will comply with the requirements and conditions of the 
award, including the assurances set forth in Form D.
    b. Certificate of State Approval (Form B). An application from a 
State or local court must include a copy of Form B signed by the 
State's Chief Justice or Chief Judge, the director of the designated 
agency, or the head of the designated council. The signature denotes 
that the proposed project has been approved by the State's highest 
court or the agency or council it has designated. It denotes further 
that if the Institute approved funding for the project, the court or 
the specified designee will receive, administer, and be accountable for 
the awarded funds.
    c. Budget Form (Form C). Applicants must submit a Form C. In 
addition to Form C, applicants must provide a detailed budget narrative 
providing an explanation of the basis for the estimates in each budget 
category (see subsection A.4. below).
    If funds from other sources are required to conduct the project, 
either as match or to support other aspects of the project, the source, 
current status of the request, and anticipated decision date must be 
provided.
    d. Assurances (Form D). This form lists the statutory, regulatory, 
and policy requirements with which recipients of Institute funds must 
comply.
    e. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities. Applicants other than units 
of State or

[[Page 63143]]

local government are required to disclose whether they, or another 
entity that is part of the same organization as the applicant, have 
advocated a position before Congress on any issue, and to identify the 
specific subjects of their lobbying efforts (see section VI.A.7.).
2. Project Abstract
    The abstract should highlight the purposes, goals, methods, and 
anticipated benefits of the proposed project. It should not exceed 1 
single-spaced page on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper.
3. Program Narrative
    The program narrative for an application may not exceed 25 double-
spaced pages on 8\1/2\ by 11 inch paper. Margins must be at least 1 
inch, and type size must be at least 12-point and 12 cpi. The pages 
should be numbered. This page limit does not include the forms, the 
abstract, the budget narrative, and any appendices containing resumes 
and letters of cooperation or endorsement. Additional background 
material should be attached only if it is essential to impart a clear 
understanding of the proposed project. Numerous and lengthy appendices 
are strongly discouraged.
    The program narrative should address the following topics:
    a. Project Objectives. The applicant should include a clear, 
concise statement of what the proposed project is intended to 
accomplish. In stating the objectives of the project, applicants should 
focus on the overall programmatic objective (e.g., to enhance 
understanding and skills regarding a specific subject, or to determine 
how a certain procedure affects the court and litigants) rather than on 
operational objectives (e.g., provide training for 32 judges and court 
managers, or review data from 300 cases).
    b. Program Areas To Be Covered. The applicant should note the 
Special Interest category or categories that are addressed by the 
proposed project (see section III.A.).
    c. Need for the Project. If the project is to be conducted in any 
specific location(s), the applicant should discuss the particular needs 
of the project site(s) to be addressed by the project and why those 
needs are not being met through the use of existing programs, 
procedures, services, or other resources.
    If the project is not site-specific, the applicant should discuss 
the problems that the proposed project would address, and why existing 
programs, procedures, services, or other resources cannot adequately 
resolve those problems. The discussion should include specific 
references to the relevant literature and to the experience in the 
field.
    d. Tasks, Methods and Evaluations. 
    (1) Tasks and Methods. The applicant should delineate the tasks to 
be performed in achieving the project objectives and the methods to be 
used for accomplishing each task. For example:
    (a) For research and evaluation projects, the applicant should 
include the data sources, data collection strategies, variables to be 
examined, and analytic procedures to be used for conducting the 
research or evaluation and ensuring the validity and general 
applicability of the results. For projects involving human subjects, 
the discussion of methods should address the procedures for obtaining 
respondents' informed consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and 
freedom from risk or harm, and protecting others who are not the 
subjects of research but would be affected by the research. If the 
potential exists for risk or harm to human subjects, a discussion 
should be included that explains the value of the proposed research and 
the methods to be used to minimize or eliminate such risk.
    (b) For education and training projects, the applicant should 
include the adult education techniques to be used in designing and 
presenting the program, including the teaching/learning objectives of 
the educational design, the teaching methods to be used, and the 
opportunities for structured interaction among the participants; how 
faculty would be recruited, selected, and trained; the proposed number 
and length of the conferences, courses, seminars, or workshops to be 
conducted and the estimated number of persons who would attend them; 
the materials to be provided and how they would be developed; and the 
cost to participants.
    (c) For demonstration projects, the applicant should include the 
demonstration sites and the reasons they were selected, or if the sites 
have not been chosen, how they would be identified and their 
cooperation obtained; and how the program or procedures would be 
implemented and monitored.
    (d) For technical assistance projects, the applicant should explain 
the types of assistance that would be provided; the particular issues 
and problems for which assistance would be provided; how requests would 
be obtained and the type of assistance determined; how suitable 
providers would be selected and briefed; how reports would be reviewed; 
and the cost to recipients.
    (2) Evaluation. Every project must include an evaluation plan to 
determine whether the project met its objectives. The evaluation should 
be designed to provide an objective and independent assessment of the 
effectiveness or usefulness of the training or services provided; the 
impact of the procedures, technology, or services tested; or the 
validity and applicability of the research conducted. In addition, 
where appropriate, the evaluation process should be designed to provide 
ongoing or periodic feedback on the effectiveness or utility of the 
project in order to promote its continuing improvement. The plan should 
present the qualifications of the evaluator(s); describe the criteria 
that would be used to evaluate the project's effectiveness in meeting 
its objectives; explain how the evaluation would be conducted, 
including the specific data collection and analysis techniques to be 
used; discuss why this approach would be appropriate; and present a 
schedule for completion of the evaluation within the proposed project 
period.
    The evaluation plan should be appropriate to the type of project 
proposed. For example:
    (a) An evaluation approach suited to many research projects is a 
review by an advisory panel of the research methodology, data 
collection instruments, preliminary analyses, and products as they are 
drafted. The panel should be comprised of independent researchers and 
practitioners representing the perspectives affected by the proposed 
project.
    (b) The most valuable approaches to evaluating educational or 
training programs reinforce the participants' learning experience while 
providing useful feedback on the impact of the program and possible 
areas for improvement. One appropriate evaluation approach is to assess 
the acquisition of new knowledge, skills, attitudes, or understanding 
through participant feedback on the seminar or training event. Such 
feedback might include a self-assessment of what was learned along with 
the participant's response to the quality and effectiveness of faculty 
presentations, the format of sessions, the value or usefulness of the 
material presented, and other relevant factors. Another appropriate 
approach would be to use an independent observer who might request both 
verbal and written responses from participants in the program. When an 
education project involves the development of curricular materials, an 
advisory panel of relevant experts can be coupled with a test of the 
curriculum to obtain the

[[Page 63144]]

reactions of participants and faculty as indicated above.
    (c) The evaluation plan for a demonstration project should 
encompass an assessment of program effectiveness (e.g., how well did it 
work?); user satisfaction, if appropriate; the cost-effectiveness of 
the program; a process analysis of the program (e.g., was the program 
implemented as designed, and/or did it provide the services intended to 
the targeted population?); the impact of the program (e.g., what effect 
did the program have on the court, and/or what benefits resulted from 
the program?); and the replicability of the program or components of 
the program.
    (d) For technical assistance projects, applicants should explain 
how the quality, timeliness, and impact of the assistance provided 
would be determined, and develop a mechanism for feedback from both the 
users and providers of the technical assistance.
    Evaluation plans involving human subjects should include a 
discussion of the procedures for obtaining respondents' informed 
consent, ensuring the respondents' privacy and freedom from risk or 
harm, and protecting others who are not the subjects of the evaluation 
but would be affected by it. Other than the provision of 
confidentiality to respondents, human subject protection issues 
ordinarily are not applicable to participants evaluating an education 
program.
    e. Project Management. The applicant should present a detailed 
management plan, including the starting and completion date for each 
task; the time commitments to the project of key staff and their 
responsibilities regarding each project task; and the procedures that 
would ensure that all tasks are performed on time, within budget, and 
at the highest level of quality. In preparing the project time line, 
Gantt Chart, or schedule, applicants should make certain that all 
project activities, including publication or reproduction of project 
products and their initial dissemination, would occur within the 
proposed project period. The management plan must also provide for the 
submission of Quarterly Progress and Financial Reports within 30 days 
after the close of each calendar quarter (i.e., no later than January 
30, April 30, July 30, and October 30), per section VI.A.13.
    Applicants should be aware that the Institute is unlikely to 
approve a limited extension of the grant period without very good 
cause. Therefore, the management plan should be as realistic as 
possible and fully reflect the time commitments of the proposed project 
staff and consultants.
    f. Products. The program narrative in the application should 
contain a description of the products to be developed (e.g., training 
curricula and materials, audiotapes, videotapes, DVDs, computer 
software, CD-ROM disks, articles, guidelines, manuals, reports, 
handbooks, benchbooks, or books), including when they would be 
submitted to the Institute. The budget should include the cost of 
producing and disseminating the product to each in-State SJI library 
(see Appendix A), State chief justice, State court administrator, and 
other appropriate judges or court personnel.
    (1) Dissemination Plan. The application must explain how and to 
whom the products would be disseminated; describe how they would 
benefit the State courts, including how they could be used by judges 
and court personnel; identify development, production, and 
dissemination costs covered by the project budget; and present the 
basis on which products and services developed or provided under the 
grant would be offered to the courts community and the public at large 
(i.e., whether products would be distributed at no cost to recipients, 
or if costs are involved, the reason for charging recipients and the 
estimated price of the product) (see section VI.A.11.b.). Ordinarily, 
applicants should schedule all product preparation and distribution 
activities within the project period.
    A copy of each product must be sent to the library established in 
each State to collect the materials developed with Institute support 
(see Appendix A). Applicants proposing to develop Web-based products 
should provide for sending a hard-copy document to the SJI-designated 
libraries and other appropriate audiences to alert them to the 
availability of the Web site or electronic product (i.e., a written 
report with a reference to the Web site).
    Fifteen (15) copies of all project products must be submitted to 
the Institute, along with an electronic version in .html or .pdf 
format.
    (2) Types of Products and Press Releases. The type of product to be 
prepared depends on the nature of the project. For example, in most 
instances, the products of a research, evaluation, or demonstration 
project should include an article summarizing the project findings that 
is publishable in a journal serving the courts community nationally, an 
executive summary that would be disseminated to the project's primary 
audience, or both. Applicants proposing to conduct empirical research 
or evaluation projects with national import should describe how they 
would make their data available for secondary analysis after the grant 
period (see section VI.A.14.a.).
    The curricula and other products developed through education and 
training projects should be designed for use outside the classroom so 
that they may be used again by the original participants and others in 
the course of their duties.
    In addition, recipients of project grants must prepare a press 
release describing the project and announcing the results, and 
distribute the release to a list of national and State judicial branch 
organizations. SJI will provide press release guidelines and a list of 
recipients to grantees at least 30 days before the end of the grant 
period.
    (3) Institute Review. Applicants must submit a final draft of all 
written grant products to the Institute for review and approval at 
least 30 days before the products are submitted for publication or 
reproduction. For products in a videotape or CD-ROM format, applicants 
must provide for Institute review of the product at the treatment, 
script, rough-cut, and final stages of development, or their 
equivalents. No grant funds may be obligated for publication or 
reproduction of a final grant product without the written approval of 
the Institute (see section VI.A.11.f.).
    (4) Acknowledgment, Disclaimer, and Logo. Applicants must also 
include in all project products a prominent acknowledgment that support 
was received from the Institute and a disclaimer paragraph based on the 
example provided in section VI.A.11.a.2. of the Guideline. The ``SJI'' 
logo must appear on the front cover of a written product, or in the 
opening frames of a video, unless the Institute approves another 
placement.
    g. Applicant Status. An applicant that is not a State or local 
court and has not received a grant from the Institute within the past 
three years should state whether it is either a national non-profit 
organization controlled by, operating in conjunction with, and serving 
the judicial branches of State governments, or a national non-profit 
organization for the education and training of State court judges and 
support personnel (see section II.). If the applicant is a nonjudicial 
unit of Federal, State, or local government, it must explain whether 
the proposed services could be adequately provided by non-governmental 
entities.
    h. Staff Capability. The applicant should include a summary of the 
training and experience of the key staff members and consultants that 
qualify

[[Page 63145]]

them for conducting and managing the proposed project. Resumes of 
identified staff should be attached to the application. If one or more 
key staff members and consultants are not known at the time of the 
application, a description of the criteria that would be used to select 
persons for these positions should be included. The applicant also 
should identify the person who would be responsible for managing and 
reporting on the financial aspects of the proposed project.
    i. Organizational Capacity. Applicants that have not received a 
grant from the Institute within the past three years should include a 
statement describing their capacity to administer grant funds, 
including the financial systems used to monitor project expenditures 
(and income, if any), and a summary of their past experience in 
administering grants, as well as any resources or capabilities that 
they have that would particularly assist in the successful completion 
of the project.
    Unless requested otherwise, an applicant that has received a grant 
from the Institute within the past three years should describe only the 
changes in its organizational capacity, tax status, or financial 
capability that may affect its capacity to administer a grant.
    If the applicant is a non-profit organization (other than a 
university), it must also provide documentation of its 501(c) tax-
exempt status as determined by the Internal Revenue Service and a copy 
of a current certified audit report. For purposes of this requirement, 
``current'' means no earlier than two years prior to the present 
calendar year.
    If a current audit report is not available, the Institute will 
require the organization to complete a financial capability 
questionnaire, which must be signed by a Certified Public Accountant. 
Other applicants may be required to provide a current audit report, a 
financial capability questionnaire, or both, if specifically requested 
to do so by the Institute.
    j. Statement of Lobbying Activities. Non-governmental applicants 
must submit the Institute's Disclosure of Lobbying Activities Form, 
which documents whether they, or another entity that is a part of the 
same organization as the applicant, have advocated a position before 
Congress on any issue, and identifies the specific subjects of their 
lobbying efforts (see Appendix B).
    k. Letters of Cooperation or Support. If the cooperation of courts, 
organizations, agencies, or individuals other than the applicant is 
required to conduct the project, the applicant should attach written 
assurances of cooperation and availability to the application, or send 
them under separate cover. To ensure sufficient time to bring them to 
the Board's attention, letters of support sent under separate cover 
must be received by the deadlines set below in subsection A.5.
4. Budget Narrative
    The budget narrative should provide the basis for the computation 
of all project-related costs. When the proposed project would be 
partially supported by grants from other funding sources, applicants 
should make clear what costs would be covered by those other grants. 
Additional background information or schedules may be attached if they 
are essential to obtaining a clear understanding of the proposed 
budget. Numerous and lengthy appendices are strongly discouraged.
    The budget narrative should cover the costs of all components of 
the project and clearly identify costs attributable to the project 
evaluation. Under OMB grant guidelines incorporated by reference in 
this Guideline, grant funds may not be used to purchase alcoholic 
beverages.
    a. Justification of Personnel Compensation. The applicant should 
set forth the percentages of time to be devoted by the individuals who 
would staff the proposed project, the annual salary of each of those 
persons, and the number of work days per year used for calculating the 
percentages of time or daily rates of those individuals. The applicant 
should explain any deviations from current rates or established written 
organizational policies. If grant funds are requested to pay the salary 
and related costs for a current employee of a court or other unit of 
government, the applicant should explain why this would not constitute 
a supplantation of State or local funds in violation of 42 U.S.C. 
10706(d)(1). An acceptable explanation may be that the position to be 
filled is a new one established in conjunction with the project or that 
the grant funds would support only the portion of the employee's time 
that would be dedicated to new or additional duties related to the 
project.
    b. Fringe Benefit Computation. The applicant should provide a 
description of the fringe benefits provided to employees. If 
percentages are used, the authority for such use should be presented, 
as well as a description of the elements included in the determination 
of the percentage rate.
    c. Consultant/Contractual Services and Honoraria. The applicant 
should describe the tasks each consultant would perform, the estimated 
total amount to be paid to each consultant, the basis for compensation 
rates (e.g., the number of days multiplied by the daily consultant 
rates), and the method for selection. Rates for consultant services 
must be set in accordance with section VII.I.2.c. Prior written 
Institute approval is required for any consultant rate in excess of 
$800 per day; Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more 
than $1,100 per day. Honorarium payments must be justified in the same 
manner as consultant payments.
    d. Travel. Transportation costs and per diem rates must comply with 
the policies of the applicant organization. If the applicant does not 
have an established travel policy, then travel rates must be consistent 
with those established by the Institute or the Federal Government (a 
copy of the Institute's travel policy is available upon request). The 
budget narrative should include an explanation of the rate used, 
including the components of the per diem rate and the basis for the 
estimated transportation expenses. The purpose of the travel should 
also be included in the narrative.
    e. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase only the 
equipment necessary to demonstrate a new technological application in a 
court or that is otherwise essential to accomplishing the objectives of 
the project. Equipment purchases to support basic court operations 
ordinarily will not be approved. The applicant should describe the 
equipment to be purchased or leased and explain why the acquisition of 
that equipment is essential to accomplish the project's goals and 
objectives. The narrative should clearly identify which equipment is to 
be leased and which is to be purchased. The method of procurement 
should also be described. Purchases of automated data processing 
equipment must comply with section VII.I.2.b.
    f. Supplies. The applicant should provide a general description of 
the supplies necessary to accomplish the goals and objectives of the 
grant. In addition, the applicant should provide the basis for the 
amount requested for this expenditure category.
    g. Construction. Construction expenses are prohibited except for 
the limited purposes set forth in section VI.A.16.b. Any allowable 
construction or renovation expense should be described in detail in the 
budget narrative.
    h. Telephone. Applicants should include anticipated telephone 
charges, distinguishing between monthly charges and long distance 
charges in the budget

[[Page 63146]]

narrative. Also, applicants should provide the basis used to calculate 
the monthly and long distance estimates.
    i. Postage. Anticipated postage costs for project-related mailings, 
including distribution of the final product(s), should be described in 
the budget narrative. The cost of special mailings, such as for a 
survey or for announcing a workshop, should be distinguished from 
routine operational mailing costs. The bases for all postage estimates 
should be included in the budget narrative.
    j. Printing/Photocopying. Anticipated costs for printing or 
photocopying project documents, reports, and publications should be 
included in the budget narrative, along with the bases used to 
calculate these estimates.
    k. Indirect Costs. Recoverable indirect costs are limited to no 
more than 75% of a grantee's direct personnel costs, i.e. salaries plus 
fringe benefits (see section VII.I.4.).
    Applicants should describe the indirect cost rates applicable to 
the grant in detail. If costs often included within an indirect cost 
rate are charged directly (e.g., a percentage of the time of senior 
managers to supervise project activities), the applicant should specify 
that these costs are not included within its approved indirect cost 
rate. These rates must be established in accordance with section 
VII.I.4. If the applicant has an indirect cost rate or allocation plan 
approved by any Federal granting agency, a copy of the approved rate 
agreement must be attached to the application.
    l. Match. Applicants that do not contemplate making matching 
contributions continuously throughout the course of the project or on a 
task-by-task basis must provide a schedule within 30 days after the 
beginning of the project period indicating at what points during the 
project period the matching contributions would be made (see sections 
VI.A.8., and VII.E.1.).
5. Submission Requirements
    a. Every applicant must submit an original and three copies of the 
application package consisting of Form A; Form B, if the application is 
from a State or local court, or a Disclosure of Lobbying Form, if the 
applicant is not a unit of State or local government; Form C; the 
Application Abstract; the Program Narrative; the Budget Narrative; and 
any necessary appendices.
    Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications 
will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 
30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next 
Board meeting. Please mark Project Application on the application 
package envelope and send it to: State Justice Institute, 1650 King 
Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.
    Receipt of each application will be acknowledged by letter or e-
mail.
    b. Applicants submitting more than one application may include 
material that would be identical in each application in a cover letter. 
This material will be incorporated by reference into each application 
and counted against the 25-page limit for the program narrative. A copy 
of the cover letter should be attached to each copy of the application.

B. Technical Assistance (TA) Grants

1. Application Procedures
    For a summary of the application procedures for TA Grants, visit 
the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click On-
Line Tutorials, then Technical Assistance Grant.
    In lieu of formal applications, applicants for TA Grants may 
submit, at any time, an original and three copies of a detailed letter 
describing the proposed project as well as a Form A, ``State Justice 
Institute Application'' (see Appendix B). Letters from individual trial 
or appellate courts must be signed by the presiding judge or manager of 
that court. Letters from State court systems must be signed by the 
Chief Justice or State Court Administrator. Letters from regional court 
associations must be signed by the president of the association.
2. Application Format
    Although there is no prescribed form for the letter, or a minimum 
or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the 
following information:
    a. Need for Funding. What is the critical need facing the 
applicant? How would the proposed technical assistance help the 
applicant meet this critical need? Why cannot State or local resources 
fully support the costs of the required consultant services?
    b. Project Description. What tasks would the consultant be expected 
to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which organization or 
individual would be hired to provide the assistance, and how was this 
consultant selected? If a consultant has not yet been identified, what 
procedures and criteria would be used to select the consultant 
(applicants are expected to follow their jurisdictions' normal 
procedures for procuring consultant services)? What specific tasks 
would the consultant(s) and court staff undertake? What is the schedule 
for completion of each required task and the entire project? How would 
the applicant oversee the project and provide guidance to the 
consultant, and who at the court or regional court association would be 
responsible for coordinating all project tasks and submitting quarterly 
progress and financial status reports?
    If the consultant has been identified, the applicant should provide 
a letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in 
and availability for the project, as well as the consultant's ability 
to complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the 
proposed cost. The consultant must agree to submit a detailed written 
report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical 
assistance.
    c. Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be 
taken to facilitate implementation of the consultant's recommendations 
upon completion of the technical assistance? For example, if the 
support or cooperation of specific court officials or committees, other 
agencies, funding bodies, organizations, or a court other than the 
applicant would be needed to adopt the changes recommended by the 
consultant and approved by the court, how would they be involved in the 
review of the recommendations and development of the implementation 
plan?
    d. Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its 
Designated Agency or Council. If a State or local court submits a 
request for technical assistance, it must include written concurrence 
on the need for the technical assistance. This concurrence may be a 
copy of SJI FORM B (see Appendix B) signed by the Chief Justice of the 
State Supreme Court or the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from 
the State Chief Justice or designee. The concurrence may be submitted 
with the applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to 
consideration of the application. The concurrence also must specify 
whether the State Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account 
for the grant funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or 
a specified agency or council to receive the funds directly.
3. Budget and Matching State Contribution
    A completed Form E, ``Line-Item Budget Form'' (see Appendix C), and 
budget narrative must be included with the letter requesting technical 
assistance. The estimated cost of the

[[Page 63147]]

technical assistance services should be broken down into the categories 
listed on the budget form rather than aggregated under the Consultant/
Contractual category.
    The budget narrative should provide the basis for all project-
related costs, including the basis for determining the estimated 
consultant costs, if compensation of the consultant is required (e.g., 
the number of days per task times the requested daily consultant rate). 
Applicants should be aware that consultant rates above $800 per day 
must be approved in advance by the Institute, and that no consultant 
will be paid more than $1,100 per day from Institute funds. In 
addition, the budget should provide for submission of two copies of the 
consultant's final report to the Institute.
    Recipients of TA Grants do not have to submit an audit report but 
must maintain appropriate documentation to support expenditures (see 
section VI.A.3.).
4. Submission Requirements
    Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications 
will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 
30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next 
Board meeting.
    If the support or cooperation of agencies, funding bodies, 
organizations, or courts other than the applicant would be needed in 
order for the consultant to perform the required tasks, written 
assurances of such support or cooperation should accompany the 
application letter. Support letters also may be submitted under 
separate cover; however, to ensure that there is sufficient time to 
bring them to the attention of the Board's Technical Assistance Grant 
Committee, letters sent under separate cover must be received by the 
same date as the technical assistance request being supported.

C. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grants

1. Application Procedures
    For a summary of the application procedures for CAT Grants, visit 
the Institute's Web site (http://www.statejustice.org) and click on On-
Line Tutorials, then Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grant.
    In lieu of formal applications, applicants should submit an 
original and three photocopies of a detailed letter as well as a Form 
A, ``State Justice Institute Application'' (see Appendix B).
2. Application Format
    Although there is no prescribed format for the letter, or a minimum 
or maximum page limit, letters of application should include the 
following information:
    a. For adaptation of a curriculum:
    (1) Project Description. What is the title of the model curriculum 
to be adapted and who originally developed it? Why is this education 
program needed at the present time? What are the project's goals? What 
are the learning objectives of the adapted curriculum? What program 
components would be implemented, and what types of modifications, if 
any, are anticipated in length, format, learning objectives, teaching 
methods, or content? Who would be responsible for adapting the model 
curriculum? Who would the participants be, how many would there be, how 
would they be recruited, and from where would they come (e.g., from a 
single local jurisdiction, from across the State, from a multi-State 
region, from across the nation)?
    (2) Need for Funding. Why are sufficient State or local resources 
unavailable to fully support the modification and presentation of the 
model curriculum? What is the potential for replicating or integrating 
the adapted curriculum in the future using State or local funds, once 
it has been successfully adapted and tested?
    (3) Likelihood of Implementation. What is the proposed timeline, 
including the project start and end dates? On what date(s) would the 
judicial branch education program be presented? What process would be 
used to modify and present the program? Who would serve as faculty, and 
how were they selected? What measures would be taken to facilitate 
subsequent presentations of the program? [Note: Ordinarily, an 
independent evaluation of a curriculum adaptation project is not 
required; however, the results of any evaluation should be included in 
the final report.]
    (4) Expressions of Interest by Judges and/or Court Personnel. Does 
the proposed program have the support of the court system or 
association leadership, and of judges, court managers, and judicial 
branch education personnel who are expected to attend? [Note: 
Applicants may demonstrate this by attaching letters of support.]
    (5) Chief Justice's Concurrence. Local courts should attach a 
concurrence form signed by the Chief Justice of the State or his or her 
designee (see Appendix B, Form B).
    b. For training assistance:
    (1) Need for Funding. What is the court reform or initiative 
prompting the need for training? How would the proposed training help 
the applicant implement planned changes at the court? Why cannot State 
or local resources fully support the costs of the required training?
    (2) Project Description. What tasks would the trainer(s) be 
expected to perform, and how would they be accomplished? Which 
organization or individual would be hired, if in-house personnel are 
not the trainers, to provide the training, and how was the trainer 
selected? If a trainer has not yet been identified, what procedures and 
criteria would be used to select the trainer? [Note: Applicants are 
expected to follow their jurisdictions' normal procedures for procuring 
consultant services.] What specific tasks would the trainer and court 
staff or regional court association members undertake? What 
presentation methods will be used? What is the schedule for completion 
of each required task and the entire project? How would the applicant 
oversee the project and provide guidance to the trainer, and who at the 
court or affiliated with the regional court association would be 
responsible for coordinating all project tasks and submitting quarterly 
progress and financial status reports?
    If the trainer has been identified, the applicant should provide a 
letter from that individual or organization documenting interest in and 
availability for the project, as well as the trainer's ability to 
complete the assignment within the proposed time frame and for the 
proposed cost. The trainer must agree to submit a detailed written 
report to the court and the Institute upon completion of the technical 
assistance.
    (3) Likelihood of Implementation. What steps have been or would be 
taken to coordinate the implementation of the new reform, initiative, 
etc. and the training to support the same? For example, if the support 
or cooperation of specific court or regional court association 
officials or committees, other agencies, funding bodies, organizations, 
or a court other than the applicant would be needed to adopt the reform 
and initiate the training proposed, how would they be involved in the 
review of the recommendations and development of the implementation 
plan?
    (4) Support for the Project from the State Supreme Court or its 
Designated Agency or Council. If a State or local court submits an 
application, it must include written concurrence on the need for the 
technical assistance. This concurrence may be a copy of SJI Form B (see 
Appendix B) signed by the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court or 
the Chief Justice's designee, or a letter from the State Chief Justice 
or designee. The concurrence may be submitted with the

[[Page 63148]]

applicant's letter or under separate cover prior to consideration of 
the application. The concurrence also must specify whether the State 
Supreme Court would receive, administer, and account for the grant 
funds, if awarded, or would designate the local court or a specified 
agency or council to receive the funds directly.
4. Budget and Matching State Contribution
    Applicants should attach a copy of budget Form E (see Appendix C) 
and a budget narrative (see subsection A.4. above) that describes the 
basis for the computation of all project-related costs and the source 
of the match offered.
5. Submission Requirements
    Letters of application may be submitted at any time. Applications 
will be considered on a rolling basis. Applications received less than 
30 days before a quarterly Board meeting will be considered at the next 
Board meeting.
    For curriculum adaptation requests, applicants should allow at 
least 60 days between the Board meeting and the date of the proposed 
program to allow sufficient time for needed planning. For example, a 
court that plans to conduct an education program in June 2007 should 
submit its application no later than 30 days before the Board's winter 
(March) meeting.

D. Scholarships

1. Limitations
    An applicant may apply for a scholarship for only one educational 
program during any given application cycle. Applicants may not receive 
more than one scholarship in a three-year period unless the course 
specifically assumes multi-year participation or the course is part of 
a graduate degree program in judicial studies in which the applicant is 
currently enrolled (neither exception should be taken as a commitment 
on the part of the SJI Board to approve serial scholarships).
    Scholarship funds may be used only to cover the costs of tuition, 
transportation, and reasonable lodging expenses (not to exceed $150 per 
night, including taxes). Transportation expenses may include round-trip 
coach airfare or train fare. Scholarship recipients are strongly 
encouraged to take advantage of excursion or other special airfares 
(e.g., reductions offered when a ticket is purchased 21 days in advance 
of the travel date) when making their travel arrangements. Recipients 
who drive to a program site may receive $.445/mile up to the amount of 
the advanced-purchase round-trip airfare between their homes and the 
program sites. Funds to pay tuition, transportation, and lodging 
expenses in excess of $1,500 and other costs of attending the program--
such as conference fees, meals, materials, transportation to and from 
airports, and local transportation (including rental cars)--at the 
program site must be obtained from other sources or borne by the 
scholarship recipient. Scholarship applicants are encouraged to check 
other sources of financial assistance and to combine aid from various 
sources whenever possible.
    A scholarship is not transferable to another individual. It may be 
used only for the course specified in the application unless the 
applicant's request to attend a different course that meets the 
eligibility requirements is approved in writing by the Institute. 
Decisions on such requests will be made within 30 days after the 
receipt of the request letter.
2. Eligibility Requirements
    For a summary of the scholarship award process, visit the 
Institute's Web site at http://www.statejustice.org and click on On-
Line Tutorials, then Scholarship.
    a. Recipients. Scholarships can be awarded only to full-time judges 
of State or local trial and appellate courts; full-time professional, 
State, or local court personnel with management responsibilities; and 
supervisory and management probation personnel in judicial branch 
probation offices. Senior judges, part-time judges, quasi-judicial 
hearing officers including referees and commissioners, administrative 
law judges, staff attorneys, law clerks, line staff, law enforcement 
officers, and other executive branch personnel are not eligible to 
receive a scholarship.
    b. Courses. A scholarship can be awarded only for: (1) A course 
presented in a State other than the one in which the applicant resides 
or works, or (2) an online course. The course must be designed to 
enhance the skills of new or experienced judges and court managers; or 
be offered by a recognized graduate program for judges or court 
managers. The annual or mid-year meeting of a State or national 
organization of which the applicant is a member does not qualify as an 
out-of-State educational program for scholarship purposes, even though 
it may include workshops or other training sessions.
    Applicants are encouraged not to wait for the decision on a 
scholarship to register for an educational program they wish to attend.
3. Forms
    a. Scholarship Application--Form S1 (Appendix D). The Scholarship 
Application requests basic information about the applicant and the 
educational program the applicant would like to attend. It also 
addresses the applicant's commitment to share the skills and knowledge 
gained with local court colleagues and to submit an evaluation of the 
program the applicant attends. The Scholarship Application must bear 
the original signature of the applicant. Faxed or photocopied 
signatures will not be accepted.
    b. Scholarship Application Concurrence--Form S2 (Appendix D). 
Judges and court managers applying for scholarships must submit the 
written concurrence of the Chief Justice of the State's Supreme Court 
(or the Chief Justice's designee) on the Institute's Judicial Education 
Scholarship Concurrence form (see Appendix D). The signature of the 
presiding judge of the applicant's court cannot be substituted for that 
of the Chief Justice or the Chief Justice's designee. Court managers, 
other than elected clerks of court, also must submit a letter of 
support from their immediate supervisors.
4. Submission Requirements
    Scholarship applications must be submitted during the periods 
specified below:
    January 1 and February 23, 2007, for programs beginning between 
April 1 and June 30, 2007;
    April 2 and May 25, 2007 for programs beginning between July 1 and 
September 30, 2007;
    July 2 and August 24, 2007 for programs beginning between October 1 
and December 31, 2007; and
    October 1 and November 30, 2007 for programs beginning between 
January 1 and March 31, 2008.
    No exceptions or extensions will be granted. Applications sent 
prior to the beginning of an application period will be treated as 
having been sent one week after the beginning of that application 
period. All the required items must be received for an application to 
be considered. If the Concurrence form or letter of support is sent 
separately from the application, the postmark date of the last item to 
be sent will be used in applying the above criteria.
    All applications should be sent by mail or courier (not fax or e-
mail) to: Scholarship Program Coordinator, State Justice Institute, 
1650 King Street, Suite 600, Alexandria, VA 22314.

[[Page 63149]]

E. Partner Grants

    SJI and its funding partners may meld, pick and choose, or waive 
their application procedures, grant cycles, or grant requirements to 
expedite the award of jointly-funded grants targeted at emerging or 
high priority problems confronting State and local courts. As often as 
not, SJI may solicit brief proposals from potential grantees to shop 
among fellow financial partners as a first step. Should SJI be chosen 
as the lead grant manager, Project Grant application procedures will 
apply to the proposed Partner Grant. As with Project Grants, Partner 
Grants will be targeted at initiatives likely to have a significant 
national impact.

V. Application Review Procedures

A. Preliminary Inquiries

    The Institute staff will answer inquiries concerning application 
procedures. The staff contact will be named in the Institute's letter 
or e-mail acknowledging receipt of the application.

B. Selection Criteria

1. Project Grant Applications
    a. Project Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the 
criteria set forth below. The Institute will accord the greatest weight 
to the following criteria:
    (1) The soundness of the methodology;
    (2) The demonstration of need for the project;
    (3) The appropriateness of the proposed evaluation design;
    (4) If applicable, the key findings and recommendations of the most 
recent evaluation and the proposed responses to those findings and 
recommendations;
    (5) The applicant's management plan and organizational 
capabilities;
    (6) The qualifications of the project's staff;
    (7) The products and benefits resulting from the project, including 
the extent to which the project will have long-term benefits for State 
courts across the nation;
    (8) The degree to which the findings, procedures, training, 
technology, or other results of the project can be transferred to other 
jurisdictions;
    (9) The reasonableness of the proposed budget; and
    (10) The demonstration of cooperation and support of other agencies 
that may be affected by the project.
    (11) The proposed project's relationship to one of the Special 
Interest categories set forth in section III.A.
    b. In determining which projects to support, the Institute will 
also consider whether the applicant is a State court, a national court 
support or education organization, a non-court unit of government, or 
other type of entity eligible to receive grants under the Institute's 
enabling legislation (see section II.); the availability of financial 
assistance from other sources for the project; the amount of the 
applicant's match; the extent to which the proposed project would also 
benefit the Federal courts or help State courts enforce Federal 
constitutional and legislative requirements; and the level of 
appropriations available to the Institute in the current year and the 
amount expected to be available in succeeding fiscal years.
2. Technical Assistance (TA) Grant Applications
    TA Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the following 
criteria:
    a. Whether the assistance would address a critical need of the 
applicant;
    b. The soundness of the technical assistance approach to the 
problem;
    c. The qualifications of the consultant(s) to be hired or the 
specific criteria that will be used to select the consultant(s);
    d. The commitment of the court or association to act on the 
consultant's recommendations; and
    e. The reasonableness of the proposed budget.
    The Institute also will consider factors such as the level and 
nature of the match that would be provided, diversity of subject 
matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations available to 
the Institute in the current year, and the amount expected to be 
available in succeeding fiscal years.
3. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grant Applications
    CAT Grant applications will be rated on the basis of the following 
criteria:
    a. For curriculum adaptation projects:
    (1) The goals and objectives of the proposed project;
    (2) The need for outside funding to support the program;
    (3) The appropriateness of the approach in achieving the project's 
educational objectives;
    (4) The likelihood of effective implementation and integration of 
the modified curriculum into ongoing educational programming; and
    (5) Expressions of interest by the judges and/or court personnel 
who would be directly involved in or affected by the project.
    b. For training assistance:
    (1) Whether the training would address a critical need of the court 
or association;
    (2) The soundness of the training approach to the problem;
    (3) The qualifications of the trainer(s) to be hired or the 
specific criteria that will be used to select the trainer(s);
    (4) The commitment of the court or association to the training 
program; and
    (5) The reasonableness of the proposed budget.
    The Institute will also consider factors such as the reasonableness 
of the amount requested, compliance with match requirements, diversity 
of subject matter, geographic diversity, the level of appropriations 
available in the current year, and the amount expected to be available 
in succeeding fiscal years.
4. Scholarships
    Scholarships will be approved only for programs that either (1) 
enhance the skills of judges and court managers; or (2) are part of a 
graduate degree program for judges or court personnel. Scholarships 
will be awarded on the basis of:
    a. The date on which the application and concurrence (and support 
letter, if required) were sent (``first come, first served'');
    b. The unavailability of State or local funds or scholarship funds 
from another source to cover the costs of attending the program, or 
participating online;
    c. The absence of educational programs in the applicant's State 
addressing the topic(s) covered by the educational program for which 
the scholarship is being sought;
    d. Geographic balance among the recipients;
    e. The balance of scholarships among educational providers and 
programs;
    f. The balance of scholarships among the types of courts and court 
personnel (trial judge, appellate judge, trial court administrator) 
represented; and
    g. The level of appropriations available to the Institute in the 
current year and the amount expected to be available in succeeding 
fiscal years.
    The postmark or courier receipt will be used to determine the date 
on which the application form and other required items were sent.
5. Partner Grants
    It seems probable that the selection criteria for Partner Grants 
will be driven by the collective priorities of the ``bankers' 
roundtable'' that forms around this grant-making opportunity and the 
collective assessments of roundtable participants regarding the needs 
and capabilities of court and court-related organizations. Having 
settled on priorities, SJI and its financial partners will likely 
contact the courts or court-related organizations most

[[Page 63150]]

acceptable as pilots, laboratories, consultants, or the like. Should 
SJI be chosen as the lead grant manager, Project Grant application 
review procedures will apply to the proposed Partner Grant.

C. Review and Approval Process

1. Project Grant Applications
    The Institute's Board of Directors will review the applications 
competitively. The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary and 
a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant selection criterion. 
The staff will present the narrative summaries and rating sheets to the 
Board for its review. The Board will review all application summaries 
and decide which projects it will fund. The decision to fund a project 
is solely that of the Board of Directors.
    The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of 
the Institute.
2. Technical Assistance (TA) and Curriculum Adaptation and Training 
(CAT) Grant Applications
    The Institute staff will prepare a narrative summary of each 
application and a rating sheet assigning points for each relevant 
selection criterion. The Board of Directors has delegated its authority 
to approve TA and CAT Grants to the committee established for each 
program. The committee will review the applications competitively.
    The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of 
the Institute.
3. Scholarships
    A committee of the Institute's Board of Directors will review 
scholarship applications quarterly. The Board of Directors has 
delegated its authority to approve scholarships to the committee 
established for the program. The committee will review the applications 
competitively. In the event of a tie vote, the Chairman will serve as 
the tie-breaker.
    The Chairman of the Board will sign approved awards on behalf of 
the Institute.
4. Partner Grants
    SJI's internal process for the review and approval of Partner 
Grants will depend upon negotiations with fellow financiers. SJI may 
use its procedures, a partner's procedures, a mix of both, or entirely 
unique procedures. All Partner Grants will have to be approved by the 
Board of Directors on whatever schedule makes sense at the time.

D. Return Policy

    Unless a specific request is made, unsuccessful applications will 
not be returned. Applicants are advised that Institute records are 
subject to the provisions of the Federal Freedom of Information Act, 5 
U.S.C. 552.

E. Notification of Board Decision

    1. The Institute will send written notice to applicants concerning 
all Board decisions to approve, defer, or deny their respective 
applications. For all applications (except scholarships), the Institute 
also will convey the key issues and questions that arose during the 
review process. A decision by the Board to deny an application may not 
be appealed, but it does not prohibit resubmission of a proposal based 
on that application in a subsequent funding cycle. The Institute will 
also notify the State court administrator when grants are approved by 
the Board to support projects that will be conducted by or involve 
courts in that State.
    2. The Institute intends to notify each scholarship applicant of 
the Board committee's decision within 30 days after the close of the 
relevant application period.

F. Response to Notification of Approval

    With the exception of those approved for scholarships, applicants 
have 30 days from the date of the letter notifying them that the Board 
has approved their application to respond to any revisions requested by 
the Board. If the requested revisions (or a reasonable schedule for 
submitting such revisions) have not been submitted to the Institute 
within 30 days after notification, the approval may be rescinded and 
the application presented to the Board for reconsideration. In the 
event an issue will only be resolved after award, such as the selection 
of a consultant, the final award document will include a Special 
Condition that will require additional grantee reporting and Institute 
review and approval. Special Conditions, in the form of incentives or 
sanctions, may also be used in situations where past poor performance 
by a grantee necessitates increased grant oversight.

VI. Compliance Requirements

    The State Justice Institute Act contains limitations and conditions 
on grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements awarded by the 
Institute. The Board of Directors has approved additional policies 
governing the use of Institute grant funds. These statutory and policy 
requirements are set forth below.

A. Recipients of Project Grants

1. Advocacy
    No funds made available by the Institute may be used to support or 
conduct training programs for the purpose of advocating particular 
nonjudicial public policies or encouraging nonjudicial political 
activities (42 U.S.C. 10706(b)).
2. Approval of Key Staff
    If the qualifications of an employee or consultant assigned to a 
key project staff position are not described in the application or if 
there is a change of a person assigned to such a position, the 
recipient must submit a description of the qualifications of the newly 
assigned person to the Institute. Prior written approval of the 
qualifications of the new person assigned to a key staff position must 
be received from the Institute before the salary or consulting fee of 
that person and associated costs may be paid or reimbursed from grant 
funds (see section VIII.A.7.).
3. Audit
    Recipients of project grants must provide for an annual fiscal 
audit which includes an opinion on whether the financial statements of 
the grantee present fairly its financial position and its financial 
operations are in accordance with generally accepted accounting 
principles (see section VII.K. for the requirements of such audits). 
Scholarship recipients, Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grants, and 
Technical Assistance Grants are not required to submit an audit, but 
they must maintain appropriate documentation to support all 
expenditures (see section VIII.K.).
4. Budget Revisions
    Budget revisions among direct cost categories that: (a) Transfer 
grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category, or (b) individually or 
cumulatively exceed five percent of the approved original budget or the 
most recently approved revised budget require prior Institute approval 
(see section VIII.A.1.).
5. Conflict of Interest
    Personnel and other officials connected with Institute-funded 
programs must adhere to the following requirements:
    a. No official or employee of a recipient court or organization 
shall participate personally through decision, approval, disapproval, 
recommendation, the rendering of advice, investigation, or otherwise in 
any proceeding, application, request for a ruling or other 
determination, contract, grant,

[[Page 63151]]

cooperative agreement, claim, controversy, or other particular matter 
in which Institute funds are used, where, to his or her knowledge, he 
or she or his or her immediate family, partners, organization other 
than a public agency in which he or she is serving as officer, 
director, trustee, partner, or employee or any person or organization 
with whom he or she is negotiating or has any arrangement concerning 
prospective employment, has a financial interest.
    b. In the use of Institute project funds, an official or employee 
of a recipient court or organization shall avoid any action which might 
result in or create the appearance of:
    (1) Using an official position for private gain; or
    (2) affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the 
integrity of the Institute program.
    c. Requests for proposals or invitations for bids issued by a 
recipient of Institute funds or a subgrantee or subcontractor will 
provide notice to prospective bidders that the contractors who develop 
or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, and/or 
requests for proposals for a proposed procurement will be excluded from 
bidding on or submitting a proposal to compete for the award of such 
procurement.
6. Inventions and Patents
    If any patentable items, patent rights, processes, or inventions 
are produced in the course of Institute-sponsored work, such fact shall 
be promptly and fully reported to the Institute. Unless there is a 
prior agreement between the grantee and the Institute on disposition of 
such items, the Institute shall determine whether protection of the 
invention or discovery shall be sought. The Institute will also 
determine how the rights in the invention or discovery, including 
rights under any patent issued thereon, shall be allocated and 
administered in order to protect the public interest consistent with 
``Government Patent Policy'' (President's Memorandum for Heads of 
Executive Departments and Agencies, February 18, 1983, and statement of 
Government Patent Policy).
7. Lobbying
    a. Funds awarded to recipients by the Institute shall not be used, 
indirectly or directly, to influence Executive Orders or similar 
promulgations by Federal, State or local agencies, or to influence the 
passage or defeat of any legislation by Federal, State or local 
legislative bodies (42 U.S.C. 10706(a)).
    b. It is the policy of the Board of Directors to award funds only 
to support applications submitted by organizations that would carry out 
the objectives of their applications in an unbiased manner. Consistent 
with this policy and the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 10706, the Institute 
will not knowingly award a grant to an applicant that has, directly or 
through an entity that is part of the same organization as the 
applicant, advocated a position before Congress on the specific subject 
matter of the application.
8. Matching Requirements
    All grantees other than scholarship recipients are required to 
provide a match. A match is the portion of project costs not borne by 
the Institute. Match includes both cash and in-kind contributions. Cash 
match is the direct outlay of funds by the grantee or a third party to 
support the project. Examples of cash match are the dedication of funds 
to support a new employee or purchase new equipment to carry out the 
project or the application of project income (e.g., tuition or the 
proceeds of sales of grant products) generated during the grant period 
to grant costs.
    In-kind match consists of contributions of time and/or services of 
current staff members, space, supplies, etc., made to the project by 
the grantee or others (e.g., advisory board members) working directly 
on the project or that portion of the grantee's Federally approved 
indirect cost rate that exceeds the Guideline's limit of permitted 
charges (75% of salaries and benefits).
    Under normal circumstances, allowable match may be incurred only 
during the project period. When appropriate, and with the prior written 
permission of the Institute, match may be incurred from the date of the 
Board of Directors' approval of an award. Match does not include the 
time of participants attending an education program. The amount and 
nature of required match depends on the type of grant (see section 
III.).
    The grantee is responsible for ensuring that the total amount of 
match proposed is actually contributed. If a proposed contribution is 
not fully met, the Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly, 
in order to maintain the ratio originally provided for in the award 
agreement (see section VII.E.1.).
    The Board of Directors looks favorably upon any unrequired match 
contributed by applicants when making grant decisions.
    The match requirement may be waived in exceptionally rare 
circumstances upon the request of the Chief Justice of the highest 
court in the State or the highest ranking official in the requesting 
organization and approval by the Board of Directors (42 U.S.C. 
10705(d)). The Board of Directors encourages all applicants to provide 
the maximum amount of cash and in-kind match possible, even if a waiver 
is approved. The amount and nature of match are criteria in the grant 
selection process (see section V.B.1.b.).
9. Nondiscrimination
    No person may, on the basis of race, sex, national origin, 
disability, color, or creed be excluded from participation in, denied 
the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under any 
program or activity supported by Institute funds. Recipients of 
Institute funds must immediately take any measures necessary to 
effectuate this provision.
10. Political Activities
    No recipient may contribute or make available Institute funds, 
program personnel, or equipment to any political party or association, 
or the campaign of any candidate for public or party office. Recipients 
are also prohibited from using funds in advocating or opposing any 
ballot measure, initiative, or referendum. Officers and employees of 
recipients shall not intentionally identify the Institute or recipients 
with any partisan or nonpartisan political activity associated with a 
political party or association, or the campaign of any candidate for 
public or party office (42 U.S.C. 10706(a)).
11. Products
    a. Acknowledgment, Logo, and Disclaimer. (1) Recipients of 
Institute funds must acknowledge prominently on all products developed 
with grant funds that support was received from the Institute. The 
``SJI'' logo must appear on the front cover of a written product, or in 
the opening frames of a video product, unless another placement is 
approved in writing by the Institute. This includes final products 
printed or otherwise reproduced during the grant period, as well as 
reprintings or reproductions of those materials following the end of 
the grant period. A camera-ready logo sheet is available from the 
Institute upon request.
    (2) Recipients also must display the following disclaimer on all 
grant products: ``This [document, film, videotape, etc.] was developed 
under [grant/cooperative agreement] number SJI-[insert number] from the 
State Justice Institute. The points of view expressed are those of the 
[author(s), filmmaker(s), etc.] and do not necessarily represent the 
official

[[Page 63152]]

position or policies of the State Justice Institute.''
    b. Charges for Grant-Related Products/Recovery of Costs. (1) When 
Institute funds fully cover the cost of developing, producing, and 
disseminating a product (e.g., a report, curriculum, videotape, or 
software), the product should be distributed to the field without 
charge. When Institute funds only partially cover the development, 
production, or dissemination costs, the grantee may, with the 
Institute's prior written approval, recover its costs for developing, 
producing, and disseminating the material to those requesting it, to 
the extent that those costs were not covered by Institute funds or 
grantee matching contributions.
    (2) Applicants should disclose their intent to sell grant-related 
products in the application. Grantees must obtain the written prior 
approval of the Institute of their plans to recover project costs 
through the sale of grant products. Written requests to recover costs 
ordinarily should be received during the grant period and should 
specify the nature and extent of the costs to be recouped, the reason 
that such costs were not budgeted (if the rationale was not disclosed 
in the approved application), the number of copies to be sold, the 
intended audience for the products to be sold, and the proposed sale 
price. If the product is to be sold for more than $25, the written 
request also should include a detailed itemization of costs that will 
be recovered and a certification that the costs were not supported by 
either Institute grant funds or grantee matching contributions.
    (3) In the event that the sale of grant products results in 
revenues that exceed the costs to develop, produce, and disseminate the 
product, the revenue must continue to be used for the authorized 
purposes of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent 
with the State Justice Institute Act that have been approved by the 
Institute (see section VII.G.).
    c. Copyrights. Except as otherwise provided in the terms and 
conditions of an Institute award, a recipient is free to copyright any 
books, publications, or other copyrightable materials developed in the 
course of an Institute-supported project, but the Institute shall 
reserve a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to 
reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use, 
the materials for purposes consistent with the State Justice Institute 
Act.
    d. Due Date. All products and, for TA and CAT grants, consultant 
and/or trainer reports (see section VI.B.1 & 2) are to be completed and 
distributed (see below) not later than the end of the award period, not 
the 90-day close out period. The latter is only intended for grantee 
final reporting and to liquidate obligations (see section VII.L.).
    e. Distribution. In addition to the distribution specified in the 
grant application, grantees shall send:
    (1) Fifteen (15) copies of each final product developed with grant 
funds to the Institute, unless the product was developed under either a 
Technical Assistance or a Curriculum Adaptation and Training Grant, in 
which case submission of 2 copies is required;
    (2) An electronic version of the product in .html or .pdf format to 
the Institute; and
    (3) One copy of each final product developed with grant funds to 
the library established in each State to collect materials prepared 
with Institute support. A list of the libraries is contained in 
Appendix A. Labels for these libraries are available on the Institute's 
Web site, http://www.statejustice.org.
    (4) Bound copies of products, where possible and cost-effective, 
rather than hard copies in ring binders, to SJI depository libraries. 
Grantees that develop Web-based electronic products must send a hard-
copy document to the SJI-designated libraries and other appropriate 
audiences to alert them to the availability of the Web site or 
electronic product. Recipients of Technical Assistance and Curriculum 
Adaptation and Training Grants are not required to submit final 
products to State libraries.
    (5) A press release describing the project and announcing the 
results to a list of national and State judicial branch organizations 
provided by the Institute.
    f. Institute Approval. No grant funds may be obligated for 
publication or reproduction of a final product developed with grant 
funds without the written approval of the institute. Grantees shall 
submit a final draft of each written product to the Institute for 
review and approval. The draft must be submitted at least 30 days 
before the product is scheduled to be sent for publication or 
reproduction to permit Institute review and incorporation of any 
appropriate changes required by the Institute. Grantees must provide 
for timely reviews by the Institute of videotape, DVD or CD-ROM 
products at the treatment, script, rough cut, and final stages of 
development or their equivalents.

    g. Original Material. All products prepared as the result of 
Institute-supported projects must be originally-developed material 
unless otherwise specified in the award documents. Material not 
originally developed that is included in such products must be properly 
identified, whether the material is in a verbatim or extensive 
paraphrase format.
12. Prohibition Against Litigation Support
    No funds made available by the Institute may be used directly or 
indirectly to support legal assistance to parties in litigation, 
including cases involving capital punishment.
13. Reporting Requirements
    a. Recipients of Institute funds other than scholarships must 
submit Quarterly Progress and Financial Status Reports within 30 days 
of the close of each calendar quarter (that is, no later than January 
30, April 30, July 30, and October 30). The Quarterly Progress Reports 
shall include a narrative description of project activities during the 
calendar quarter, the relationship between those activities and the 
task schedule and objectives set forth in the approved application or 
an approved adjustment thereto, any significant problem areas that have 
developed and how they will be resolved, and the activities scheduled 
during the next reporting period. Failure to comply with the 
requirements of this provision could result in the termination of a 
grantee's award.
    b. The quarterly Financial Status Report must be submitted in 
accordance with section VII.H.2. of this Guideline. A final project 
Progress Report and Financial Status Report shall be submitted within 
90 days after the end of the grant period in accordance with section 
VII.L.1. of this Guideline.
14. Research
    a. Availability of Research Data for Secondary Analysis. Upon 
request, grantees must make available for secondary analysis a 
diskette(s) or data tape(s) containing research and evaluation data 
collected under an Institute grant and the accompanying code manual. 
Grantees may recover the actual cost of duplicating and mailing or 
otherwise transmitting the data set and manual from the person or 
organization requesting the data. Grantees may provide the requested 
data set in the format in which it was created and analyzed.
    b. Confidentiality of Information. Except as provided by Federal 
law other than the State Justice Institute Act, no

[[Page 63153]]

recipient of financial assistance from SJI may use or reveal any 
research or statistical information furnished under the Act by any 
person and identifiable to any specific private person for any purpose 
other than the purpose for which the information was obtained. Such 
information and copies thereof shall be immune from legal process, and 
shall not, without the consent of the person furnishing such 
information, be admitted as evidence or used for any purpose in any 
action, suit, or other judicial, legislative, or administrative 
proceedings.
    c. Human Subject Protection. Human subjects are defined as 
individuals who are participants in an experimental procedure or who 
are asked to provide information about themselves, their attitudes, 
feelings, opinions, and/or experiences through an interview, 
questionnaire, or other data collection technique. All research 
involving human subjects shall be conducted with the informed consent 
of those subjects and in a manner that will ensure their privacy and 
freedom from risk or harm and the protection of persons who are not 
subjects of the research but would be affected by it, unless such 
procedures and safeguards would make the research impractical. In such 
instances, the Institute must approve procedures designed by the 
grantee to provide human subjects with relevant information about the 
research after their involvement and to minimize or eliminate risk or 
harm to those subjects due to their participation.
15. State and Local Court Applications
    Each application for funding from a State or local court must be 
approved, consistent with State law, by the State's Supreme Court, or 
its designated agency or council. The Supreme Court or its designee 
shall receive, administer, and be accountable for all funds awarded on 
the basis of such an application (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)(4)). See section 
VII.C.2.
16. Supplantation and Construction
    To ensure that funds are used to supplement and improve the 
operation of State courts, rather than to support basic court services, 
funds shall not be used for the following purposes:
    a. To supplant State or local funds supporting a program or 
activity (such as paying the salary of court employees who would be 
performing their normal duties as part of the project, or paying rent 
for space which is part of the court's normal operations);
    b. To construct court facilities or structures, except to remodel 
existing facilities or to demonstrate new architectural or 
technological techniques, or to provide temporary facilities for new 
personnel or for personnel involved in a demonstration or experimental 
program; or
    c. Solely to purchase equipment.
17. Suspension or Termination of Funding
    After providing a recipient reasonable notice and opportunity to 
submit written documentation demonstrating why fund termination or 
suspension should not occur, the Institute may terminate or suspend 
funding of a project that fails to comply substantially with the Act, 
the Guideline, or the terms and conditions of the award (42 U.S.C. 
10708(a)).
18. Title to Property
    At the conclusion of the project, title to all expendable and 
nonexpendable personal property purchased with Institute funds shall 
vest in the recipient court, organization, or individual that purchased 
the property if certification is made to and approved by the Institute 
that the property will continue to be used for the authorized purposes 
of the Institute-funded project or other purposes consistent with the 
State Justice Institute Act. If such certification is not made or the 
Institute disapproves such certification, title to all such property 
with an aggregate or individual value of $1,000 or more shall vest in 
the Institute, which will direct the disposition of the property.

B. Recipients of Technical Assistance (TA) and Curriculum Adaptation 
and Training (CAT) Grants

    Recipients of TA and CAT Grants must comply with the requirements 
listed in section VI.A. (except the requirements pertaining to audits 
in subsection A.3. above and product dissemination and approval in 
subsection A.11.e. and f. above) and the reporting requirements below:
1. Technical Assistance (TA) Grant Reporting Requirements
    Recipients of TA Grants must submit to the Institute one copy of a 
final report that explains how it intends to act on the consultant's 
recommendations, as well as two copies of the consultant's written 
report.
2. Curriculum Adaptation and Training (CAT) Grant Reporting 
Requirements
    Recipients of CAT Grants must submit one copy of the agenda or 
schedule, outline of presentations and/or relevant instructor's notes, 
copies of overhead transparencies, power point presentations, or other 
visual aids, exercises, case studies and other background materials, 
hypotheticals, quizzes, and other materials involving the participants, 
manuals, handbooks, conference packets, evaluation forms, and 
suggestions for replicating the program, including possible faculty or 
the preferred qualifications or experience of those selected as 
faculty, developed under the grant at the conclusion of the grant 
period, along with a final report that includes any evaluation results 
and explains how the grantee intends to present the educational program 
in the future, as well as two copies of the consultant's or trainer's 
report.

C. Scholarship Recipients

    1. Scholarship recipients are responsible for disseminating the 
information received from the course to their court colleagues locally 
and, if possible, throughout the State (e.g., by developing a formal 
seminar, circulating the written material, or discussing the 
information at a meeting or conference).
    Recipients also must submit to the Institute a certificate of 
attendance at the program, an evaluation of the educational program 
they attended, and a copy of the notice of any scholarship funds 
received from other sources. A copy of the evaluation must be sent to 
the Chief Justice of the scholarship recipient's State. A State or 
local jurisdiction may impose additional requirements on scholarship 
recipients.
    2. To receive the funds authorized by a scholarship award, 
recipients must submit a Scholarship Payment Voucher (Form S3) together 
with a tuition statement from the program sponsor, a transportation 
fare receipt (or statement of the driving mileage to and from the 
recipient's home to the site of the educational program), and a lodging 
receipt.
    Scholarship Payment Vouchers must be submitted within 90 days after 
the end of the course which the recipient attended.
    3. Scholarship recipients are encouraged to check with their tax 
advisors to determine whether the scholarship constitutes taxable 
income under Federal and State law.

D. Partner Grants

    The compliance requirements for Partner Grant recipients will 
depend upon the agreements struck between the grant financiers and 
between lead financiers and grantees. Should SJI be the lead, the 
compliance requirements for Project Grants will apply.

[[Page 63154]]

VII. Financial Requirements

A. Purpose

    The purpose of this section is to establish accounting system 
requirements and offer guidance on procedures to assist all grantees, 
subgrantees, contractors, and other organizations in:
    1. Complying with the statutory requirements for the award, 
disbursement, and accounting of funds;
    2. Complying with regulatory requirements of the Institute for the 
financial management and disposition of funds;
    3. Generating financial data to be used in planning, managing, and 
controlling projects; and
    4. Facilitating an effective audit of funded programs and projects.

B. References

    Except where inconsistent with specific provisions of this 
Guideline, the following circulars are applicable to Institute grants 
and cooperative agreements under the same terms and conditions that 
apply to Federal grantees. The circulars supplement the requirements of 
this section for accounting systems and financial record-keeping and 
provide additional guidance on how these requirements may be satisfied 
(circulars may be obtained on the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb).
    1. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21, Cost 
Principles for Educational Institutions.
    2. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87, Cost 
Principles for State and Local Governments.
    3. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-88, Indirect 
Cost Rates, Audit and Audit Follow-up at Educational Institutions.
    4. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-102, Uniform 
Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local 
Governments.
    5. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110, Grants and 
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other 
Non-Profit Organizations.
    6. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-122, Cost 
Principles for Non-profit Organizations.
    7. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-128, Audits of 
State and Local Governments.
    8. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, Audits of 
Institutions of Higher Education and Other Non-profit Institutions.

C. Supervision and Monitoring Responsibilities

1. Grantee Responsibilities
    All grantees receiving awards from the Institute are responsible 
for the management and fiscal control of all funds. Responsibilities 
include accounting for receipts and expenditures, maintaining adequate 
financial records, and refunding expenditures disallowed by audits.
2. Responsibilities of State Supreme Court
    a. Each application for funding from a State or local court must be 
approved, consistent with State law, by the State's Supreme Court, or 
its designated agency or council.
    b. The State Supreme Court or its designee shall receive all 
Institute funds awarded to such courts; be responsible for assuring 
proper administration of Institute funds; and be responsible for all 
aspects of the project, including proper accounting and financial 
record-keeping by the subgrantee. These responsibilities include:
    (1) Reviewing Financial Operations. The State Supreme Court or its 
designee should be familiar with, and periodically monitor, its 
subgrantees' financial operations, records system, and procedures. 
Particular attention should be directed to the maintenance of current 
financial data.
    (2) Recording Financial Activities. The subgrantee's grant award or 
contract obligation, as well as cash advances and other financial 
activities, should be recorded in the financial records of the State 
Supreme Court or its designee in summary form. Subgrantee expenditures 
should be recorded on the books of the State Supreme Court or evidenced 
by report forms duly filed by the subgrantee. Matching contributions 
provided by subgrantees should likewise be recorded, as should any 
project income resulting from program operations.
    (3) Budgeting and Budget Review. The State Supreme Court or its 
designee should ensure that each subgrantee prepares an adequate budget 
as the basis for its award commitment. The State Supreme Court should 
maintain the details of each project budget on file.
    (4) Accounting for Match. The State Supreme Court or its designee 
will ensure that subgrantees comply with the match requirements 
specified in this Guideline (see section VI.A.8.).
    (5) Audit Requirement. The State Supreme Court or its designee is 
required to ensure that subgrantees meet the necessary audit 
requirements set forth by the Institute (see sections K. below and 
VI.A.3.).
    (6) Reporting Irregularities. The State Supreme Court, its 
designees, and its subgrantees are responsible for promptly reporting 
to the Institute the nature and circumstances surrounding any financial 
irregularities discovered.

D. Accounting System

    The grantee is responsible for establishing and maintaining an 
adequate system of accounting and internal controls and for ensuring 
that an adequate system exists for each of its subgrantees and 
contractors. An acceptable and adequate accounting system:
    1. Properly accounts for receipt of funds under each grant awarded 
and the expenditure of funds for each grant by category of expenditure 
(including matching contributions and project income);
    2. Assures that expended funds are applied to the appropriate 
budget category included within the approved grant;
    3. Presents and classifies historical costs of the grant as 
required for budgetary and evaluation purposes;
    4. Provides cost and property controls to assure optimal use of 
grant funds;
    5. Is integrated with a system of internal controls adequate to 
safeguard the funds and assets covered, check the accuracy and 
reliability of the accounting data, promote operational efficiency, and 
assure conformance with any general or special conditions of the grant;
    6. Meets the prescribed requirements for periodic financial 
reporting of operations; and
    7. Provides financial data for planning, control, measurement, and 
evaluation of direct and indirect costs.

E. Total Cost Budgeting and Accounting

    Accounting for all funds awarded by the Institute must be 
structured and executed on a ``Total Project Cost'' basis. That is, 
total project costs, including Institute funds, State and local 
matching shares, and any other fund sources included in the approved 
project budget serve as the foundation for fiscal administration and 
accounting. Grant applications and financial reports require budget and 
cost estimates on the basis of total costs.
1. Timing of Matching Contributions
    Matching contributions need not be applied at the exact time of the 
obligation of Institute funds. Ordinarily, the full matching share must 
be obligated during the award period; however, with the written 
permission of

[[Page 63155]]

the Institute, contributions made following approval of the grant by 
the Institute's Board of Directors but before the beginning of the 
grant may be counted as match. Grantees that do not contemplate making 
matching contributions continuously throughout the course of a project, 
or on a task-by-task basis, are required to submit a schedule within 30 
days after the beginning of the project period indicating at what 
points during the project period the matching contributions will be 
made. If a proposed cash or in-kind match is not fully met, the 
Institute may reduce the award amount accordingly to maintain the ratio 
of grant funds to matching funds stated in the award agreement.
2. Records for Match
    All grantees must maintain records that clearly show the source, 
amount, and timing of all matching contributions. In addition, if a 
project has included, within its approved budget, contributions which 
exceed the required matching portion, the grantee must maintain records 
of those contributions in the same manner as it does Institute funds 
and required matching shares. For all grants made to State and local 
courts, the State Supreme Court has primary responsibility for grantee/
subgrantee compliance with the requirements of this section (see 
subsection C.2. above).

F. Maintenance and Retention of Records

    All financial records, including supporting documents, statistical 
records, and all other information pertinent to grants, subgrants, 
cooperative agreements, or contracts under grants, must be retained by 
each organization participating in a project for at least three years 
for purposes of examination and audit. State Supreme Courts may impose 
record retention and maintenance requirements in addition to those 
prescribed in this section.
1. Coverage
    The retention requirement extends to books of original entry, 
source documents supporting accounting transactions, the general 
ledger, subsidiary ledgers, personnel and payroll records, canceled 
checks, and related documents and records. Source documents include 
copies of all grant and subgrant awards, applications, and required 
grantee/subgrantee financial and narrative reports. Personnel and 
payroll records shall include the time and attendance reports for all 
individuals reimbursed under a grant, subgrant or contract, whether 
they are employed full-time or part-time. Time and effort reports are 
required for consultants.
2. Retention Period
    The three-year retention period starts from the date of the 
submission of the final expenditure report.
3. Maintenance
    Grantees and subgrantees are expected to see that records of 
different fiscal years are separately identified and maintained so that 
requested information can be readily located. Grantees and subgrantees 
are also obligated to protect records adequately against fire or other 
damage. When records are stored away from the grantee's/subgrantee's 
principal office, a written index of the location of stored records 
should be on hand, and ready access should be assured.
4. Access
    Grantees and subgrantees must give any authorized representative of 
the Institute access to and the right to examine all records, books, 
papers, and documents related to an Institute grant.

G. Project-Related Income

    Records of the receipt and disposition of project-related income 
must be maintained by the grantee in the same manner as required for 
the project funds that gave rise to the income and must be reported to 
the Institute (see subsection H.2. below). The policies governing the 
disposition of the various types of project-related income are listed 
below.
1. Interest
    A State and any agency or instrumentality of a State, including 
institutions of higher education and hospitals, shall not be held 
accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds. When 
funds are awarded to subgrantees through a State, the subgrantees are 
not held accountable for interest earned on advances of project funds. 
Local units of government and nonprofit organizations that are grantees 
must refund any interest earned. Grantees shall ensure minimum balances 
in their respective grant cash accounts.
2. Royalties
    The grantee/subgrantee may retain all royalties received from 
copyrights or other works developed under projects or from patents and 
inventions, unless the terms and conditions of the grant provide 
otherwise.
3. Registration and Tuition Fees
    Registration and tuition fees may be considered as cash match with 
the prior written approval of the Institute. Estimates of registration 
and tuition fees, and any expenses to be offset by the fees, should be 
included in the application budget forms and narrative.
4. Income from the Sale of Grant Products
    If the sale of products occurs during the project period, the 
income may be treated as cash match with the prior written approval of 
the Institute. The costs and income generated by the sales must be 
reported on the Quarterly Financial Status Reports and documented in an 
auditable manner. Whenever possible, the intent to sell a product 
should be disclosed in the application or reported to the Institute in 
writing once a decision to sell products has been made. The grantee 
must request approval to recover its product development, reproduction, 
and dissemination costs as specified in section VI.A.11.b.
5. Other
    Other project income shall be treated in accordance with 
disposition instructions set forth in the grant's terms and conditions.

H. Payments and Financial Reporting Requirements

1. Payment of Grant Funds
    The procedures and regulations set forth below are applicable to 
all Institute grant funds and grantees.
    a. Request for Advance or Reimbursement of Funds. Grantees will 
receive funds on a ``check-issued'' basis. Upon receipt, review, and 
approval of a Request for Advance or Reimbursement by the Institute, a 
check will be issued directly to the grantee or its designated fiscal 
agent. A request must be limited to the grantee's immediate cash needs. 
The Request for Advance or Reimbursement, along with the instructions 
for its preparation, will be included in the official Institute award 
package.
    b. Termination of Advance and Reimbursement Funding. When a grantee 
organization receiving cash advances from the Institute:
    (1) Demonstrates an unwillingness or inability to attain program or 
project goals, or to establish procedures that will minimize the time 
elapsing between cash advances and disbursements, or cannot adhere to 
guideline requirements or special conditions;
    (2) Engages in the improper award and administration of subgrants 
or contracts; or
    (3) Is unable to submit reliable and/or timely reports; the 
Institute may

[[Page 63156]]

terminate advance financing and require the grantee organization to 
finance its operations with its own working capital. Payments to the 
grantee shall then be made by check to reimburse the grantee for actual 
cash disbursements. In the event the grantee continues to be deficient, 
the Institute may suspend reimbursement payments until the deficiencies 
are corrected. In extreme cases, grants may be terminated.
    c. Principle of Minimum Cash on Hand. Grantees should request funds 
based upon immediate disbursement requirements. Grantees should time 
their requests to ensure that cash on hand is the minimum needed for 
disbursements to be made immediately or within a few days.
2. Financial Reporting
    a. General Requirements. To obtain financial information concerning 
the use of funds, the Institute requires that grantees/subgrantees 
submit timely reports for review.
    b. Due Dates and Contents. A Financial Status Report is required 
from all grantees, other than scholarship recipients, for each active 
quarter on a calendar-quarter basis. This report is due within 30 days 
after the close of the calendar quarter. It is designed to provide 
financial information relating to Institute funds, State and local 
matching shares, project income, and any other sources of funds for the 
project, as well as information on obligations and outlays. A copy of 
the Financial Status Report, along with instructions for its 
preparation, is included in each official Institute Award package. If a 
grantee requests substantial payments for a project prior to the 
completion of a given quarter, the Institute may request a brief 
summary of the amount requested, by object class, to support the 
Request for Advance or Reimbursement.
3. Consequences of Non-Compliance With Submission Requirement
    Failure of the grantee to submit required financial and progress 
reports may result in suspension or termination of grant payments.

I. Allowability of Costs

1. General
    Except as may be otherwise provided in the conditions of a 
particular grant, cost allowability is determined in accordance with 
the principles set forth in OMB Circulars A-21, Cost Principles 
Applicable to Grants and Contracts with Educational Institutions; A-87, 
Cost Principles for State and Local Governments; and A-122, Cost 
Principles for Non-profit Organizations. No costs may be recovered to 
liquidate obligations incurred after the approved grant period. 
Circulars may be obtained on the OMB Web site at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb.
2. Costs Requiring Prior Approval
    a. Pre-agreement Costs. The written prior approval of the Institute 
is required for costs considered necessary but which occur prior to the 
start date of the project period.
    b. Equipment. Grant funds may be used to purchase or lease only 
that equipment essential to accomplishing the goals and objectives of 
the project. The written prior approval of the Institute is required 
when the amount of automated data processing (ADP) equipment to be 
purchased or leased exceeds $10,000 or software to be purchased exceeds 
$3,000.
    c. Consultants. The written prior approval of the Institute is 
required when the rate of compensation to be paid a consultant exceeds 
$800 a day. Institute funds may not be used to pay a consultant more 
than $1,100 per day.
    d. Budget Revisions. Budget revisions among direct cost categories 
that (i) transfer grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (ii) 
individually or cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) of the approved 
original budget or the most recently approved revised budget require 
prior Institute approval (see section VIII.A.1.).
3. Travel Costs
    Transportation and per diem rates must comply with the policies of 
the grantee. If the grantee does not have an established written travel 
policy, then travel rates must be consistent with those established by 
the Institute or the Federal Government. Institute funds may not be 
used to cover the transportation or per diem costs of a member of a 
national organization to attend an annual or other regular meeting of 
that organization.
4. Indirect Costs
    These are costs of an organization that are not readily assignable 
to a particular project but are necessary to the operation of the 
organization and the performance of the project. The cost of operating 
and maintaining facilities, depreciation, and administrative salaries 
are examples of the types of costs that are usually treated as indirect 
costs. Although the Institute's policy requires all costs to be 
budgeted directly, it will accept indirect costs if a grantee has an 
indirect cost rate approved by a Federal agency as set forth below. 
However, recoverable indirect costs are limited to no more than 75% of 
a grantee's direct personnel costs (salaries plus fringe benefits).
    a. Approved Plan Available.
    (1) A copy of an indirect cost rate agreement or allocation plan 
approved for a grantee during the preceding two years by any Federal 
granting agency on the basis of allocation methods substantially in 
accord with those set forth in the applicable cost circulars must be 
submitted to the Institute.
    (2) Where flat rates are accepted in lieu of actual indirect costs, 
grantees may not also charge expenses normally included in overhead 
pools, e.g., accounting services, legal services, building occupancy 
and maintenance, etc., as direct costs.
    b. Establishment of Indirect Cost Rates. To be reimbursed for 
indirect costs, a grantee must first establish an appropriate indirect 
cost rate. To do this, the grantee must prepare an indirect cost rate 
proposal and submit it to the Institute within three months after the 
start of the grant period to assure recovery of the full amount of 
allowable indirect costs. The rate must be developed in accordance with 
principles and procedures appropriate to the type of grantee 
institution involved as specified in the applicable OMB Circular.
    c. No Approved Plan. If an indirect cost proposal for recovery of 
indirect costs is not submitted to the Institute within three months 
after the start of the grant period, indirect costs will be irrevocably 
disallowed for all months prior to the month that the indirect cost 
proposal is received.

J. Procurement and Property Management Standards

1. Procurement Standards
    For State and local governments, the Institute has adopted the 
standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular A-102. Institutions 
of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations will 
be governed by the standards set forth in Attachment O of OMB Circular 
A-110.
2. Property Management Standards
    The property management standards as prescribed in Attachment N of 
OMB Circulars A-102 and A-110 apply to all Institute grantees and 
subgrantees except as provided in section VI.A.18. All grantees/
subgrantees are required to be prudent in the acquisition and 
management of property with grant funds. If suitable property required 
for the successful execution of projects is already available within 
the grantee or subgrantee organization, expenditures of grant funds for 
the acquisition of new

[[Page 63157]]

property will be considered unnecessary.

K. Audit Requirements

1. Implementation
    Each recipient of a Project Grant must provide for an annual fiscal 
audit. This requirement also applies to a State or local court 
receiving a subgrant from the State Supreme Court. The audit may be of 
the entire grantee or subgrantee organization or of the specific 
project funded by the Institute. Audits conducted in accordance with 
the Single Audit Act of 1984 and OMB Circular A-128, or OMB Circular A-
133, will satisfy the requirement for an annual fiscal audit. The audit 
must be conducted by an independent Certified Public Accountant, or a 
State or local agency authorized to audit government agencies. Grantees 
must send two copies of the audit report to the Institute. Grantees 
that receive funds from a Federal agency and satisfy audit requirements 
of the cognizant Federal agency must submit two copies of the audit 
report prepared for that Federal agency to the Institute in order to 
satisfy the provisions of this section.
2. Resolution and Clearance of Audit Reports
    Timely action on recommendations by responsible management 
officials is an integral part of the effectiveness of an audit. Each 
grantee must have policies and procedures for acting on audit 
recommendations by designating officials responsible for: (1) Follow-
up, (2) maintaining a record of the actions taken on recommendations 
and time schedules, (3) responding to and acting on audit 
recommendations, and (4) submitting periodic reports to the Institute 
on recommendations and actions taken.
3. Consequences of Non-Resolution of Audit Issues
    Ordinarily, the Institute will not make a subsequent grant award to 
an applicant that has an unresolved audit report involving Institute 
awards. Failure of the grantee to resolve audit questions may also 
result in the suspension or termination of payments for active 
Institute grants to that organization.

L. Close-Out of Grants

1. Grantee Close-Out Requirements
    Within 90 days after the end date of the grant or any approved 
extension thereof (see subsection L.2. below), the following documents 
must be submitted to the Institute by grantees (other than scholarship 
recipients):
    a. Financial Status Report. The final report of expenditures must 
have no unliquidated obligations and must indicate the exact balance of 
unobligated funds. Any unobligated/unexpended funds will be deobligated 
from the award by the Institute. Final payment requests for obligations 
incurred during the award period must be submitted to the Institute 
prior to the end of the 90-day close-out period. Grantees on a check-
issued basis, who have drawn down funds in excess of their obligations/
expenditures, must return any unused funds as soon as it is determined 
that the funds are not required. In no case should any unused funds 
remain with the grantee beyond the submission date of the final 
Financial Status Report.
    b. Final Progress Report. This report should describe the project 
activities during the final calendar quarter of the project and the 
close-out period, including to whom project products have been 
disseminated; provide a summary of activities during the entire 
project; specify whether all the objectives set forth in the approved 
application or an approved adjustment have been met and, if any of the 
objectives have not been met, explain why not; and discuss what, if 
anything, could have been done differently that might have enhanced the 
impact of the project or improved its operation.
    These reporting requirements apply at the conclusion of every grant 
other than a scholarship.
2. Extension of Close-out Period
    Upon the written request of the grantee, the Institute may extend 
the close-out period to assure completion of the grantee's close-out 
requirements. Requests for an extension must be submitted at least 14 
days before the end of the close-out period and must explain why the 
extension is necessary and what steps will be taken to assure that all 
the grantee's responsibilities will be met by the end of the extension 
period.

VIII. Grant Adjustments

    All requests for programmatic or budgetary adjustments requiring 
Institute approval must be submitted by the project director in a 
timely manner (ordinarily 30 days prior to the implementation of the 
adjustment being requested). All requests for changes from the approved 
application will be carefully reviewed for both consistency with this 
Guideline and the enhancement of grant goals and objectives. Failure to 
submit adjustments in a timely manner may result in the termination of 
a grantee's award.

A. Grant Adjustments Requiring Prior Written Approval

    The following grant adjustments require the prior written approval 
of the Institute:
    1. Budget revisions among direct cost categories that (a) transfer 
grant funds to an unbudgeted cost category or (b) individually or 
cumulatively exceed five percent (5%) of the approved original budget 
or the most recently approved revised budget (see section VII.I.2.d.).
    2. A change in the scope of work to be performed or the objectives 
of the project (see subsection D. below).
    3. A change in the project site.
    4. A change in the project period, such as an extension of the 
grant period and/or extension of the final financial or progress report 
deadline (see subsection E. below).
    5. Satisfaction of special conditions, if required.
    6. A change in or temporary absence of the project director (see 
subsections F. and G. below).
    7. The assignment of an employee or consultant to a key staff 
position whose qualifications were not described in the application, or 
a change of a person assigned to a key project staff position (see 
section VI.A.2.).
    8. A change in or temporary absence of the person responsible for 
managing and reporting on the grant's finances.
    9. A change in the name of the grantee organization.
    10. A transfer or contracting out of grant-supported activities 
(see subsection H. below).
    11. A transfer of the grant to another recipient.
    12. Preagreement costs (see section VII.I.2.a.).
    13. The purchase of automated data processing equipment and 
software (see section VII.I.2.b.).
    14. Consultant rates (see section VII.I.2.c.).
    15. A change in the nature or number of the products to be prepared 
or the manner in which a product would be distributed.

B. Requests for Grant Adjustments

    All grantees must promptly notify their SJI program managers, in 
writing, of events or proposed changes that may require adjustments to 
the approved project design. In requesting an adjustment, the grantee 
must set forth the reasons and basis for the proposed adjustment and 
any other information the program manager determines would help the 
Institute's review.

[[Page 63158]]

C. Notification of Approval/Disapproval

    If the request is approved, the grantee will be sent a Grant 
Adjustment signed by the Executive Director or his or her designee. If 
the request is denied, the grantee will be sent a written explanation 
of the reasons for the denial.

D. Changes in the Scope of the Grant

    Major changes in scope, duration, training methodology, or other 
significant areas must be approved in advance by the Institute. A 
grantee may make minor changes in methodology, approach, or other 
aspects of the grant to expedite achievement of the grant's objectives 
with subsequent notification of the SJI program manager.

E. Date Changes

    A request to change or extend the grant period must be made at 
least 30 days in advance of the end date of the grant. A revised task 
plan should accompany a request for an extension of the grant period, 
along with a revised budget if shifts among budget categories will be 
needed. A request to change or extend the deadline for the final 
financial report or final progress report must be made at least 14 days 
in advance of the report deadline (see section VII.L.2.).

F. Temporary Absence of the Project Director

    Whenever an absence of the project director is expected to exceed a 
continuous period of one month, the plans for the conduct of the 
project director's duties during such absence must be approved in 
advance by the Institute. This information must be provided in a letter 
signed by an authorized representative of the grantee/subgrantee at 
least 30 days before the departure of the project director, or as soon 
as it is known that the project director will be absent. The grant may 
be terminated if arrangements are not approved in advance by the 
Institute.

G. Withdrawal of/Change in Project Director

    If the project director relinquishes or expects to relinquish 
active direction of the project, the Institute must be notified 
immediately. In such cases, if the grantee/subgrantee wishes to 
terminate the project, the Institute will forward procedural 
instructions upon notification of such intent. If the grantee wishes to 
continue the project under the direction of another individual, a 
statement of the candidate's qualifications should be sent to the 
Institute for review and approval. The grant may be terminated if the 
qualifications of the proposed individual are not approved in advance 
by the Institute.

H. Transferring or Contracting Out of Grant-Supported Activities

    No principal activity of a grant-supported project may be 
transferred or contracted out to another organization without specific 
prior approval by the Institute. All such arrangements must be 
formalized in a contract or other written agreement between the parties 
involved. Copies of the proposed contract or agreement must be 
submitted for prior approval of the Institute at the earliest possible 
time. The contract or agreement must state, at a minimum, the 
activities to be performed, the time schedule, the policies and 
procedures to be followed, the dollar limitation of the agreement, and 
the cost principles to be followed in determining what costs, both 
direct and indirect, will be allowed. The contract or other written 
agreement must not affect the grantee's overall responsibility for the 
direction of the project and accountability to the Institute.

State Justice Institute Board of Directors

Robert A. Miller, Chairman, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of 
South Dakota, Pierre, SD
Joseph F. Baca, Vice-Chairman, Chief Justice (ret.), New Mexico Supreme 
Court, Albuquerque, NM
Sandra A. O'Connor, Secretary, States Attorney of Baltimore County, 
Towson, MD
Keith McNamara, Esq., Executive Committee Member, McNamara & McNamara, 
Columbus, OH
Terrence B. Adamson, Esq., Executive Vice-President, The National 
Geographic Society, Washington, DC
Robert N. Baldwin, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, 
National Center for State Courts, Richmond, VA
Carlos R. Garza, Esq., Administrative Judge (ret.), Round Rock, TX
Sophia H. Hall, Administrative Presiding Judge, Circuit Court of Cook 
County, Chicago, IL
Tommy Jewell, Presiding Children's Court Judge (ret.), Albuquerque, NM
Arthur A. McGiverin, Chief Justice (ret.), Supreme Court of Iowa, 
Ottumwa, IA
Kevin Linskey, Executive Director (ex officio)

Kevin Linskey,
Executive Director.

Appendix A--SJI Libraries: Designated Sites and Contacts

Alabama

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Timothy A. Lewis, State Law Librarian, Alabama Supreme Court, 
Judicial Building, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, AL 36104, (334) 
242-4347, [email protected].

Alaska

Anchorage Law Library

Ms. Cynthia S. Fellows, State Law Librarian, Alaska State Court Law 
Library, 303 K Street, Anchorage, AK 99501, (907) 264-0583, 
[email protected].

Arizona

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Lani Orosco, Staff Assistant, Arizona Supreme Court, Staff 
Attorney's Office Library, 1501 W. Washington, Suite 445, Phoenix, 
AZ 85007, (602) 542-5028, [email protected].

Arkansas

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. James D. Gingerich, Director, Administrative Office of the 
Courts, Supreme Court of Arkansas, Justice Building, 625 Marshall 
Street, Little Rock, AR 72201, (501) 682-9400, 
[email protected].

California

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. William C. Vickrey, Administrative Director of the Courts, 
Administrative Office of the Courts, 455 Golden Gate Avenue, San 
Francisco, CA 94102, (415) 865-4235, [email protected].

Colorado

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Linda Gruenthal, Deputy Supreme Court Law Librarian, 2 East 14th 
Avenue, Denver, CO 80203, (303) 837-3720, [email protected].

Connecticut

State Library

Ms. Denise D. Jernigan, Law Librarian, Connecticut State Library, 
231 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, CT 06106, (860) 757-6598, 
[email protected].

Delaware

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. Michael E. McLaughlin, Deputy Director, Administrative Office of 
the Courts, Carvel State Office Building, 820 North French Street, 
11th Floor, P.O. Box 8911, Wilmington, DE 19801, (302) 577-8481, 
[email protected].

[[Page 63159]]

District of Columbia

Executive Office, District of Columbia Courts

Ms. Anne B. Wicks, Executive Officer, District of Columbia Courts, 
500 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite 1500, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 879-
1700, [email protected].

Florida

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Elisabeth H. Goodner, State Courts Administrator, Office of the 
State Courts Administrator, Florida Supreme Court, Supreme Court 
Building, 500 South Duval Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399, (850) 922-
5081, [email protected].

Georgia

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. David Ratley, Director, Administrative Office of the Courts, 244 
Washington Street, SW., Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30334, (404) 656-
5171, [email protected].

Hawaii

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Ann Koto, State Law Librarian, The Supreme Court Law Library, 
417 South King St., Room 119, Honolulu, HI 96813, (808) 539-4964, 
[email protected].

Idaho

AOC Judicial Education Library/State Law Library

Mr. Richard Visser, State Law Librarian, Idaho State Law Library, 
Supreme Court Building, 451 West State St., Boise, ID 83720, (208) 
334-3316, [email protected].

Illinois

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Brenda Larison, Supreme Court of Illinois Library, 200 East 
Capitol Avenue, Springfield, IL 62701-1791, (217) 782-2425, 
[email protected].

Indiana

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Terri L. Ross, Supreme Court Librarian, Supreme Court Library, 
State House, Room 316, Indianapolis, IN 46204, (317) 232-2557, 
[email protected].

Iowa

Administrative Office of the Court

Dr. Jerry K. Beatty, Director of Judicial Branch Education, Iowa 
Judicial Branch, Iowa Judicial Branch Building, 1111 East Court 
Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50319, (515) 242-0190, 
[email protected].

Kansas

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Fred Knecht, Law Librarian, Kansas Supreme Court Library, Kansas 
Judicial Center, 301 SW. 10th Avenue, Topeka, KS 66612, (785) 296-
3257, [email protected].

Kentucky

State Law Library

Ms. Vida Vitagliano, Cataloging and Research Librarian, Kentucky 
Supreme Court Library, 700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 200, Frankfort, KY 
40601, (502) 564-4185, [email protected].

Louisiana

State Law Library

Ms. Carol Billings, Director, Louisiana Law Library, Louisiana 
Supreme Court Building, 400 Royal Street, New Orleans, LA 70130, 
(504) 310-2401, [email protected].

Maine

State Law and Legislative Reference Library

Ms. Lynn E. Randall, State Law Librarian, 43 State House Station, 
Augusta, ME 04333, (207) 287-1600, 
[email protected].

Maryland

State Law Library

Mr. Steve Anderson, Director, Maryland State Law Library, Court of 
Appeal Building, 361 Rowe Boulevard, Annapolis, MD 21401, (410) 260-
1430, [email protected].

Massachusetts

Middlesex Law Library

Ms. Linda Hom, Librarian, Middlesex Law Library, Superior Court 
House, 40 Thorndike Street, Cambridge, MA 02141, (617) 494-4148, 
[email protected].

Michigan

Michigan Judicial Institute

Dawn F. McCarty, Director, Michigan Judicial Institute, P.O. Box 
30205, Lansing, MI 48909, (517) 373-7509, [email protected].

Minnesota

State Law Library (Minnesota Judicial Center)

Ms. Barbara L. Golden, State Law Librarian, G25 Minnesota Judicial 
Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, St. Paul, MN 
55155, (612) 297-2089, [email protected].

Mississippi

Mississippi Judicial College

Hon. Leslie G. Johnson, Executive Director, Mississippi Judicial 
College, P.O. Box 8850, University, MS 38677, (662) 915-5955, 
[email protected].

Montana

State Law Library

Ms. Judith Meadows, State Law Librarian, State Law Library of 
Montana, P.O. Box 203004, Helena, MT 59620, (406) 444-3660, 
[email protected].

Nebraska

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Janice Walker, State Court Administrator, Nebraska Supreme 
Court, P.O. Box 98910, Lincoln, NE 68509-8910.

Nevada

To be determined

New Hampshire

New Hampshire Law Library

Ms. Mary Searles, Technical Services Law Librarian, New Hampshire 
Law Library, Supreme Court Building, One Noble Drive, Concord, NH 
03301-6160, (603) 271-3777, [email protected].

New Jersey

New Jersey State Library

Mr. Thomas O'Malley, Supervising Law Librarian, New Jersey State Law 
Library, 185 West State Street, P.O. Box 520, Trenton, NJ 08625-
0250, (609) 292-6230, [email protected].

New Mexico

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Thaddeus Bejnar, Librarian, Supreme Court Library, Post Office 
Drawer L, Santa Fe, NM 87504, (505) 827-4850.

New York

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Barbara Briggs, Law Librarian, Syracuse Supreme Court Law 
Library, 401 Montgomery Street, Syracuse, NY 13202, (315) 671-1150, 
[email protected].

North Carolina

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Thomas P. Davis, Librarian, North Carolina Supreme Court 
Library, 500 Justice Building, 2 East Morgan Street, Raleigh, NC 
27601, (919) 733-3425, [email protected].

North Dakota

Supreme Court Library

Ms. Marcella Kramer, Assistant Law Librarian, Supreme Court Law 
Library, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Dept. 182, 2nd Floor, Judicial 
Wing, Bismarck, ND 58505-0540, (701) 328-2229, [email protected].

Northern Mariana Islands

Supreme Court of the Northern Mariana Islands

Ms. Margarita M. Palacios, Director of Courts, Supreme Court of the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, P.O. Box 502165, 
Saipan, MP 96950, (670) 235-9700, [email protected].

Ohio

Supreme Court Library

Mr. Ken Kozlowski, Director, Law Library, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 
South Front Street, 11th Floor, Columbus, OH 43215-3431, (614) 387-
9666, [email protected].

Oklahoma

Administrative Office of the Courts

Mr. Michael D. Evans, State Court Administrator, Administrative 
Office of the Courts, 1915 North Stiles Avenue, Suite 305, Oklahoma 
City, OK 73105, (405) 521-2450, [email protected].

[[Page 63160]]

Oregon

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Kingsley W. Click, State Court Administrator, Oregon Judicial 
Department, Supreme Court Building, 1163 State Street, Salem, OR 
97301, (503) 986-5500, [email protected].

Pennsylvania

State Library of Pennsylvania

Ms. Kathleen Kline, Collection Management Librarian, State Library 
of Pennsylvania, Bureau of State Library, 333 Market Street, 
Harrisburg, PA 17126-1745, (717) 787-5718, [email protected].

Puerto Rico

Office of Court Administration

Alfredo Rivera-Mendoza, Esq., Director, Area of Planning and 
Management, Office of Court Administration, P.O. Box 917, Hato Rey, 
PR 00919.

Rhode Island

Roger Williams University

Ms. Gail Winson, Director of Law Library/Associate Professor of Law, 
Roger Williams University, School of Law Library, 10 Metacom Avenue, 
Bristol, RI 02809, 401/254-4531, [email protected].

South Carolina

Coleman Karesh Law Library (University of South Carolina School of Law)

Mr. Steve Hinckley, Director, Coleman Karesh Law Library, University 
of South Carolina, Main and Green Streets, Columbia, SC 29208, (803) 
777-5944, [email protected].

South Dakota

State Law Library

Librarian, South Dakota State Law Library, 500 East Capitol, Pierre, 
South Dakota 57501, (605) 773-4898, [email protected].

Tennessee

Tennessee State Law Library

Hon. Cornelia A. Clark, Executive Director, Administrative Office of 
the Courts, 511 Union Street, Suite 600, Nashville, TN 37219, (615) 
741-2687, [email protected].

Texas

State Law Library

Mr. Marcelino A. Estrada, Director, State Law Library, P.O. Box 
12367, Austin, TX 78711, (512) 463-1722, 
[email protected].

U.S. Virgin Islands

Library of the Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands (St. Thomas)

Librarian, The Library, Territorial Court of the Virgin Islands, 
Post Office Box 70, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands 
00804.

Utah

Utah State Judicial Administration Library

Ms. Jessica Van Buren, Utah State Library, 450 South State Street, 
P.O. Box 140220, Salt Lake City, UT 84114-0220, (801) 238-7991, 
[email protected].

Vermont

Supreme Court of Vermont

Mr. Paul J. Donovan, Law Librarian, Vermont Department of Libraries, 
109 State Street, Pavilion Office Building, Montpelier, VT 05609, 
(802) 828-3268, [email protected].

Virginia

Administrative Office of the Courts

Ms. Gail Warren, State Law Librarian, Virginia State Law Library, 
Supreme Court of Virginia, 100 North Ninth Street, 2nd Floor, 
Richmond, VA 23219-2335, (804) 786-2075, [email protected].

Washington

Washington State Law Library

Ms. Kay Newman, State Law Librarian, Washington State Law Library, 
Temple of Justice, P.O. Box 40751, Olympia, WA 98504-0751, (360) 
357-2136, [email protected].

West Virginia

Supreme Court of Appeals Library

Ms. Kaye Maerz, State Law Librarian, West Virginia Supreme Court of 
Appeals Library, 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East, Building 1, Room E-
404, Charleston, WV 25305, (304) 558-2607, [email protected].

Wisconsin

State Law Library

Ms. Jane Colwin, State Law Librarian, State Law Library, 120 M.L.K. 
Jr. Boulevard, Madison, WI 53703, (608) 261-2340, 
[email protected].

Wyoming

Wyoming State Law Library

Ms. Kathy Carlson, Law Librarian, Wyoming State Law Library, Supreme 
Court Building, 2301 Capitol Avenue, Cheyenne, WY 82002, (307) 777-
7509, [email protected].

National

American Judicature Society

Ms. Deborah Sulzbach, Acquisitions Librarian, Drake University, Law 
Library, Opperman Hall, 2507 University Avenue, Des Moines, IA 
50311-4505, (515) 271-3784, e-mail: [email protected].

JERITT

Dr. Maureen E. Conner, Executive Director, The JERITT Project, 
Michigan State University, 1407 S. Harrison Road, Suite 330 Nisbet, 
East Lansing, MI 48823-5239, (517) 353-8603, (517) 432-3965 (fax), 
[email protected], Web site: http://jeritt.msu.edu.

National Center for State Courts

Ms. Joan Cochet, Library Specialist, National Center for State 
Courts, 300 Newport Avenue, Williamsburg, VA 23185-4147, (757) 259-
1826, [email protected].

National Judicial College

Mr. Randall Snyder, Law Librarian, National Judicial College, 
Judicial College Building, MS 358, Reno, NV 89557, (775) 327-8278, 
[email protected].

BILLING CODE 6820-SC-P

[[Page 63161]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.006


[[Page 63162]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.007


[[Page 63163]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.008


[[Page 63164]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.009


[[Page 63165]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.010


[[Page 63166]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.011


[[Page 63167]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.012


[[Page 63168]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.013


[[Page 63169]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.014


[[Page 63170]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.015


[[Page 63171]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.016


[[Page 63172]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.017


[[Page 63173]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.018


[[Page 63174]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN27OC06.019

[FR Doc. 06-8837 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-SC-C