Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
2009 American Recovery and Investment Act Justice
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

2009 American Recovery and Investment Act Justice

325
views

Published on

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
325
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • See page 2 of RFP
  • Having said that, we were looking over our shoulder at three things while preparing the RFP Becoming competitive for SCA one of main purposes of reentry initiative Need to be consistent with Ohio 5 year plan We needed to tailor it to what we think we need to know about reentry programs in Ohio Going to go through priorities identified in RFP. KEEP IN MIND evaluation is not limited to these priorities. There are many other factors that can be taken into account when assessing reentry programs. Encourage you to include additional factors you think are important. NOTE – when say “we”, mean OCJS and Ohio Reentry Coalition.
  • Start with Category II Two things we want to assess: Process in developing the plan (e.g. involvement of correct parties) We want to be able to suggest to other counties things they might want to do or not do in developing their Plan. The Plan itself : CONCEDE - an outcome of the process However, to suggest how other counties should develop their Plan, it must be with an end in mind. The ends to use are SCA, Ohio 5 Year Plan, and does it look like the Plan will accomplish the county’s goals?
  • Two types (p. 2 of RFP) SCA and Ohio Plan part of funding decision Want to know if doing what they said they were going to do Re: models – especially thinking of treatment models for substance abuse, mental health, employment, etc. This assumes their services were developed using evidence based models. If not, we do want evaluation to note it. Evidence based currently “in”. It can refer to at least two different things – evidence based models and collecting information about services in order to improve their services. We want to get at both. Others Risk/needs – not just that they administer it but that actually used in planning services. Continuity of care – e.g. Center for Court Innovation evaluation of Harlem reentry. Activities and outcome links – The key is whether the reentry program itself can identify the links between what they are doing and outcomes.
  • Arrests, convictions, re-commitments to prison or jail. Want to know at what points in time they will be measured. TA vs new crimes Must look at other outcomes – e.g. substance abuse, mental health, employment. Their choice. Usual research matters of how collect, how analyze, etc. HOWEVER, what we really want to know is why the outcome(s) selected.
  • We are looking for recommendations 50% part of SCA Based on study, what program models suggest using Based on study, what program practices suggest [EXPLAIN DIFFERENCE AS WE SEE IT].
  • NOT asking for C/B EXAMPLE – Drug court C/B focus on costs/benefits for court and corrections system. 1. Not all reentry projects include a reentry court. While assessing C/B for specialized dockets may be a good thing, we think it is especially true for reentry projects. It cannot ignore courts and corrections (e.g. Justice Reinvestment Act), However, we think C/B to other systems will be important to decision makers (e.g. state budget). May want to include the C/B to other systems in selecting the outcome measures you will use other than recidivism.
  • 2/3 of team review score from Lit Review and Project Description. Project Description counts for ½ of score
  • Ohio state budget generally; Justice Reinvestment initiative in particular.
  • The first point gets at do the reviewers understand what you intend to do? Only two questions get 8 points – this and the ARRA jobs Objectives.
  • #2 a reference to inclusion of factors other than OCJS and Coalition priorities.
  • #2 - Your decision on whether make statements in the form of objectives or research questions or other type. Also, your choice on format. The point is we want explicit statements of what it is you are going to test. #3 – Gets at whether the proposed study has an overall coherence or just a grab bag of doing this or that.
  • Subject matter experience Staff qualifications Institutional experience handling grants of this type An overall statement of capacity that allows inclusion of other factors you think are relevant. Can range from software to institutional resources beyond those of the research team.
  • Transcript

    • 1. 2009 American Recovery and Investment Act Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Grant Programs REENTRY EVALUATOR Guidance for Potential Applicants presented by Bob Swisher, Policy and Research Office of Criminal Justice Services Sharon Schnelle, Researcher Office of Criminal Justice Services
    • 2. Introduction and Agenda Overview
      • Purpose of ARRA JAG funding
      • Overview of Ohio JAG Grant Program
      • Overview of Ohio Reentry Efforts
      • 2010 ARRA Reentry Subgrantees
      • Reentry Evaluation
      • How to Apply
      • Grantee Selection Process
      • Scoring Matrix
      • Tips (How to Avoid Common Mistakes)
    • 3. The Purpose of ARRA JAG Funding
      • The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program was established by the FFY 2005 omnibus spending bill. The program is administered by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance. JAG Byrne funds are designed to allow states and local governments to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime based on their own local needs and conditions.
      • Emphasis of ARRA funding is on Job Creation and/or Job Retention.
    • 4. Who is OCJS?
      • The Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services (OCJS) is a division of the Ohio Department of Public Safety. By statute, OCJS is the lead justice planning and assistance office for the state, and is responsible for administering millions of dollars in state and federal criminal justice funding every year. OCJS also evaluates programs and develops technology, provides training, and products for criminal justice professionals and communities.
      • OCJS was designated by Governor Ted Strickland to administer 2009 Recovery and Investment Act Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program funds.
    • 5. Ohio’s Reentry Efforts- State Agency Offender Reentry Coalition (HB130) April 1, 2009-Governor Strickland signed Reentry bill Mission Statement- The mission of the Reentry Coalition is to ensure successful offender reentry, reduce recidivism and enhance public safety. The Coalition will achieve these goals through collaborative partnerships with government entities, faith and community-based organizations, and other stakeholders. It will utilize a holistic evidence-based approach that starts at the point of contact with the criminal justice system and includes an emphasis on education, families, health services, alcohol and other drug treatment, employment, mentorship and housing Provide evidence of collaboration with state and local stakeholders Developed a comprehensive strategic reentry plan that contains annual and 5 year performance outcomes with a goal of reducing recidivism by 50%.
    • 6.  
    • 7. JAG Reentry Grant Program
      • 4.7 million dollars was allocated through the first round of ARRA JAG funds specifically for community reentry programs .
      • The first round solicitation funded programs under two categories.
        • Category I is for existing county or regional reentry task forces so that they can add programs to better accomplish their five year strategic plan. Six counties were awarded Category I funding.
        • Category II is for counties or regions that wish to develop reentry task forces and develop their five year strategic plan. Eight task forces were awarded Category II funding.
    • 8. JAG Reentry Grant Program (cont.)
      • Applicants could only apply under one category.
      • Only one application per county was accepted (it had to be through an established county Reentry Task Force.)
    • 9. Program Purpose
      • Applicants were expected to integrate best practices into their proposed service delivery models, and/or develop strategies to establish, develop, and maintain viable Reentry Taskforces, and assess and develop services to respond to the needs of offenders re-entering their communities.
      • Local reentry programs should be led by collaboratives indigent to the community and designed according to local needs and resources Second Chance Act.
      • Five Key Elements
    • 10. Category I Applicant requirements
      • Had to demonstrate they were an established and operational Reentry Task Force;
      • Inclusive of members required under Second Chance Act;
      • Had to submit their 5-year strategic plan with a goal of reducing recidivism by 50%; and
      • Reflect 5 key elements.
    • 11. Category II Applicant requirements
      • Included those counties interested in developing a countywide/regional reentry task force
      • Had to demonstrate the development of plan to incorporate a needs assessment or create a 5-yr strategic plan as one of their outcomes objectives
    • 12. JAG Reentry Evaluation Grant Program
      • Administered by the Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services
      • http://www.ocjs.ohio.gov/funding/reports.htm
      • No match required
      • Partnership between OCJS and statewide Ex-Offender Reentry Coalition
      • Funding for 24 months
    • 13. Reentry Evaluation: General Points
      • OCJS and Reentry Coalition intent is to provide as much latitude for evaluator as possible regarding research topics and methods.
      • Reflects our understanding of the “maturity” of reentry evaluation field.
    • 14. Reentry Evaluation: General Points
      • Second Chance Act
      • Ohio Five Year Strategic Plan
      • What can we learn about how to best implement reentry programs in Ohio?
    • 15. Category II Projects
      • Process evaluation
      • Assess county’s planning process
      • Assess county’s Five Year Strategic Plan
    • 16. Category I Projects: Process
      • Matters of fidelity
        • Second Chance Act
        • Ohio Five Year Plan
        • County’s Five Year Plan
        • Evidence based models
      • Matters of process
        • Risk/needs
        • Continuity of care
        • Program completion
        • Activities and outcomes links
        • Evidence based program improvement
    • 17. Category I Projects: Outcomes
      • Must measure recidivism
        • Evaluator selects the measure(s) of recidivism to be used
        • Must distinguish revocations for technical violations from re-commissions for new crimes
      • Must assess outcomes in addition to recidivism
        • Evaluator selects the additional outcome measure(s) to be used
        • Why was this measure(s) selected?
    • 18. Category I Projects: Recommendations
      • How achieve Second Chance Act goal of 50% reduction in recidivism?
      • Evidence based program models (e.g. treatment modalities)
      • Evidence based program practices (e.g. use of data for program improvement)
    • 19. Category I Projects: Cost/Benefit
      • Not requesting a cost/benefit study as part of this evaluation.
      • Review of proposals will include the extent to which the study will provide a basis for a subsequent cost/benefit study.
        • Reentry will require assessing costs and benefits to more than just the court and corrections systems.
        • May link potential cost/benefit study to outcome measure(s) chosen.
    • 20. JAG Reentry Application Process
      • Application: For technical assistance on any part of the JAG application, call OCJS at: 614.466.7782 or e-mail: [email_address] .
      • Award: If awarded, notifications will be faxed to selected projects. Before final approval, projects must complete and return all required forms. All awards will be for 24 months of funding, operating from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012.
      • FOCUS on JOBS! This is a unique funding stream one that emphasizes job creation and/or job maintenance. The required objectives are included in the objectives section.
      • 5 – DAY Reporting Period – grantees will only have 5 days to submit programmatic and financial reports.
    • 21. Ohio’s JAG Grant Program- How to Apply
      • Read the 2010 ARRA JAG Evaluation of Reentry Projects RFP (released April 30, 2010)
      • Make sure your organization is eligible
      • Review the 5 year strategic plans
      • Develop your description of the proposed study
      • Write your application- Be sure to provide all the requisites as outlined in the RFP. Use scoring matrix as guide.
      • Submit your application - Original and 5 copies must postmarked or received by June 1, 2010 to the Office of Criminal Justice Services. Fax copies will not be accepted.
    • 22. JAG Reentry – Who is eligible to apply?
      • All JAG applicants must have an organization, or sub-grantee, that will serve as the fiduciary agent and assume overall responsibility for the grant.
      • Only Ohio colleges and universities are eligible sub-grantees for this solicitation.
        • Indirect cost rates are capped at 10%
    • 23. JAG Reentry – Who is eligible to apply? (cont.)
      • Those who are interested in submitting a proposal must register with the Governor’s Office through www.recovery.ohio.gov and submit a Statement of Interest by June 1, 2010 by 5:00 pm.
        • Applicants that have not registered on the Governor’s
        • website will not be considered for funding.
    • 24. Writing the Application
      • Application must include Title Page, Executive Summary, Project Narrative, and Budget Pages
      • Application should be:
      • • single-sided pages
      • • 12-point font
      • • double-spaced
      • • 1 inch margins on all sides
      • An original and 5 copies must be submitted with binder clips ( no notebooks )
      • Faxed copies of your application or any part of the proposal will not be accepted .     
    • 25. Submitting Your Application
      • Proposals must be postmarked or received by OCJS by 5:00 p.m. June 1, 2010.
      • Applications received after this date and time will be classified as late and may not be considered for funding.
    • 26. JAG Reentry Funding
      • All costs must directly relate to the goals and objectives of the proposed project.
      • OCJS reserves the right to modify project budgets that were submitted or provide partial funding for applications selected for funding.
      • Receiving previous funding does not guarantee funding for this year.
      • Funding of projects through OCJS is subject to availability of federal pass-through funding resources.
    • 27. OCJS’ 3-prong Grantee Selection Process
      • OCJS Compliance Review (10%)
        • a) Ensures they were received by the closing date and time and they have complied with the basic requirements as outlined in the program solicitation. b) Verifies requested amount doesn’t exceed the limitations detailed in the RFP.
        • c) Ensures subgrantee is compliant with all reporting requirements.
      • OCJS Team Review (60%) Applications that pass the Compliance review will be reviewed and scored by a panel comprised of OCJS and DRC research staff and academics from schools not applying for these funds. The review will be based on the program elements and review criteria as presented in the RFP. The basis for this review is outlined and detailed in the scoring matrix.
      • Director’s Review (30%) Applications will be reviewed by the OCJS Executive Director and final funding recommendations will be forwarded on to the Director of Department of Public Safety and the Governor for final approval.
    • 28.
      • OCJS
      • Scoring
      • Matrix
    • 29. Literature Review ( 18 points)
      • The level to which the applicant identifies the relevance and potential for reentry programs in reducing recidivism and jail populations, controlling criminal justice costs, and protecting public safety. (up to 6 points)
      • The level to which the applicant clearly identifies additional major public policy issues related to reentry. (up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant clearly identifies major research issues related to reentry. (up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant explains the strengths or weaknesses of reentry evaluations conducted to date. (up to 2 points)
      • The extent to which the literature review is linked to the proposed study. (up to 6 points)
    • 30. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ( 54 points)
      • The level to which applicant provides a detailed description of the study design, methods of data collection, the type of data analysis that will be used (including any source limitations), and strengths/weaknesses of the design. (up to 8 points)
      • The level to which the proposed study will address the OCJS and Coalition Priorities for the Category I process evaluation. (up to 6 points)
      • The level to which the proposed study will address the OCJS and Coalition Priorities for the Category II process evaluation. (up to 6 points)
      • The level of justification and adequacy of the measure(s) of recidivism in the Category I outcome study. (up to 6 points)
    • 31. PROJECT DESCRIPTION cont. ( 54 points)
      • The level to which the applicant justifies the outcome measure(s) other than recidivism in the Category I study and the adequacy of the proposal for the measure(s). (up to 6 points)
      • The level to which the applicant describes and explains topics the study will address that are in addition to OCJS and Coalition priorities. (up to 4 points)
      • The level to which the applicant clearly describes the IRB review process the study will utilize, including identifying the IRB that will review and approve the proposed study and the timeline for IRB approval of the study. ( up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the proposal ensures the confidentiality of individuals in the study group(s). (up to 2 points)
    • 32. PROJECT DESCRIPTION cont. ( 54 points)
      • The extent to which the applicant justifies the sampling scheme or inclusion of all 14 ARRA reentry projects. (up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant provides clear definitive statements of objectives or research questions to be addressed in the study. (up to 6 points)
      • The extent to which the overall proposed study is a coherent and logically consistent approach to assessing the Ohio ARRA JAG Reentry Projects. (up to 6 points)
    • 33. ARRA OBJECTIVES (8 points)
      • Whether or not the Mandatory Jobs Objectives are clearly stated and consistent with the job creation and/or retention requirements for Recovery Act funds. (up to 8 points)
    • 34. TIMELINE & ACTIVITIES ( 4 points)
      • Level and extent to which applicant presents a comprehensive, thorough task management plan that charts the expected length of each project task and completion dates for each study deliverable. (up to 4 points)
    • 35. ORGANIZATION / STAFF CAPACITY (8 points)
      • The level to which the applicant demonstrates the history and accomplishments of the research team in conducting related studies and/or involvement in reentry-related public policy. (up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant identifies key staff or positions that will be involved in the project, including ARRA funded positions. (up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant demonstrates the experience and capacity of the institution to administer grants of this size and scope. ( up to 2 points)
      • The level to which the applicant details how they have the necessary resources to successfully implement the project and accomplish its goals. (up to 2 points)
    • 36. ADVISORY BOARD (4 points)
      • The level to which applicant provides assurance of cooperation with the Ex Offender Reentry Coalition Advisory Board. (up to 4 points)
    • 37. BUDGET AND JUSTIFICATION (12 points)
      • The level to which the applicant clearly demonstrates that the budget costs and expenses are directly related to the project design and objectives/research questions. (up to 4 points)
      • The level to which all identified costs within each budget category have been explained in an attached budget narrative that justifies the budget information. (up to 4 points)
      • The level to which the budget expenses/costs are reasonable based on the objectives of the proposed program. (4 points)
    • 38. Grant writing Tips (How to Avoid Common Mistakes)
      • Read the correct program announcement.
      • Follow the format guidelines
      • Include all necessary parts and correct number of copies of your application.
      • Submit your application with enough time to get it to OCJS before the deadline.
    • 39. Additional Questions?
      • Sharon Schnelle
      • [email_address]
      • 614-466-0346
      • Bob Swisher
      • [email_address]
      • 614-728-8230