Grant Guideline, 63140-63174 [06-8837]

Agencies

• State Justice Institute

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 208 (Friday, October 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63140-63174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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, klinskey@statejustice.org.

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 (https://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 (https://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 (https://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 https://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 Applicati