U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics National Criminal History Improvement Program Program Announcement November 1994, NCJ-151173 This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#NCHIP Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director Contents Summary Program goals Legislative background Appropriation Program strategy Application and award process Allowable costs Appendix A. Application and administrative requirements Appendix B. Application forms (not included in this file) Foreword This program announcement demonstrates the Justice Department's continuing commitment to building an accurate and useful national system of criminal records. The Federal Bureau of Investigation began this effort in 1924, with the establishment of its Identification Division which stores fingerprint-based information about both Federal offenders and arrests and dispositions under State laws. The FBI's latest developments related to this system include the Interstate Identification Index, which routes electronic search inquiries from criminal justice agencies nationwide to the appropriate State or Federal database containing the criminal history record. Later, in 1972, the Bureau of Justice Statistics' predecessor agency began to help States manage and use their criminal history records. By providing grant awards and technical assistance to States under the Criminal History Improvement Program and by sponsoring task forces, research studies, and evaluations, BJS has stimulated the ongoing nationwide effort that is increasing the extent of computerization and completeness of criminal history records. Then, beginning in 1991, the Bureau of Justice Assistance has also been involved in improving criminal history records though its administration of grants to States for criminal justice record systems which are part of the Byrne formula grant program. The importance of improving criminal history records cannot be overstated. While fingerprint-based "rap" sheets have long been vital for criminal investigations, in recent years criminal history records have been playing increasing roles in identifying serious offenders under various State and federal statutes, for making bail and pretrial release decisions, for sentencing determinations, and for correctional supervision and release decisions. The volume of non-criminal uses has been growing rapidly; these include background checks for licensing, pre-employment screening, and security clearances. Availability of accurate and complete criminal records is especially critical to the task of identifying persons who are ineligible to purchase firearms. The National Criminal History Improvement Program announced in this booklet will not only strengthen the nation's capabilities to identify felons who attempt to purchase firearms but will also begin the process of building a national system (the National Instant Criminal Background Check system) which will also permit identifying persons other than felons who are ineligible to purchase firearms. At the same time, recent legislation expands the role of criminal history records in protecting children, the elderly, and the disabled from abuse, and the NCHIP program will also help advance these efforts. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics Program Announcement National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) Summary The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is publishing this notice to announce the initiation of the National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP) in Fiscal Year 1995. The grant program implements the grant provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the National Child Protection Act of 1993, and those provisions of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, and Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 which pertain to the establishment, maintenance, or use of criminal history records and criminal record systems. This program announcement describes procedures applicable to awards to be made under the NCHIP program during FY 1995. A program announcement applicable to funding appropriated for years after FY 1995 will reflect comments received during the intervening time. Updated guidelines governing use of Byrne Formula funds pursuant to the 5% set-aside established under Section 509 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, will be issued shortly by the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), in consultation with BJS. The Byrne Guidelines should be considered together with this program announcement in developing a state's program to meet the goals of the Brady Act and the Child Protection Act. Program goals The goal of the NCHIP grant program is to improve the nation's public safety by: * facilitating the accurate and timely identification of persons who are ineligible to purchase a firearm; * ensuring that persons with responsibility for child care, elder care, or care of the disabled do not have disqualifying criminal records; and * enhancing the quality, completeness and accessibility of the nation's criminal history record systems. More specifically, NCHIP is designed to assist states: * to meet timetables for criminal history record completeness and participation in the FBI's Interstate Identification Index (III) established for each state by the Attorney General; * to improve the level of criminal history record automation, accuracy, completeness and flagging; * to expand and enhance participation in the FBI's Interstate Identification Index (III) and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS); * to develop model procedures for accessing records of persons other than felons (including persons subject to civil restraining orders arising out of domestic or child abuse) who are ineligible to purchase firearms; * to identify (through interface with the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) where necessary) records of crimes involving use of a handgun and/or abuse of children, elderly or disabled persons; and * to ensure that states develop the capability to monitor and assess state progress in meeting legislative and programmatic goals. To ensure that all NCHIP-funded efforts support the development of the national criminal record system, the program will be closely coordinated with the FBI, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). Funding under the NCHIP program is available to both those states which are subject to the 5-day waiting period ("Brady states") and those states which are operating under an alternative system pursuant to approval of BATF ("non-Brady states"). Legislative background The NCHIP program is authorized under Section 106 (b) of the Brady Act, which provides that: "The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Justice Statistics, shall, subject to appropriations and with preference to States that as of the date of enactment of this Act have the lowest percent currency of case dispositions in computerized criminal history files, make a grant to each State to be used (A) for the creation of a computerized criminal history record system or improvement of an existing system; (B) to improve accessibility to the national instant criminal background system; and (C) upon establishment of the national system, to assist the State in the transmittal of criminal records to the national system." The provisions of 18 USC 922 (g) and (n), as amended by the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994, prohibit the sale of firearms to an individual who-- (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court, of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) is a fugitive from justice; (3) is an unlawful user of, or addicted to, any controlled substance; (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or been committed to a mental institution; (5) is an alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; (6) was discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) has renounced his United States citizenship; or (8) is subject to a civil restraining order arising out of domestic or child abuse. The latter category was added as part of the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, enacted in November 1993 and effective in February 1994, requires that licensed firearm dealers request a presale check on all potential handgun purchasers by the chief law enforcement officer in the purchaser's residence community to determine, based on available records, if the individual is legally prohibited from purchase of the firearm under the provisions of 18 USC 922 or state law. The sale may not be completed for 5 days unless the dealer receives an approval before that time. The 5 day waiting period requirement terminates by 1998, at which time presale inquiries for all firearms will be made only to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Section 103 of the Brady Act provides that NICS will supply information on "whether receipt of a firearm . . . would violate (18 USC 922) or state law." As noted above, Section 106 (b) of the Brady Act establishes a grant program to assist states in upgrading criminal record systems and in improving access to, and, interface with, the NICS system. In addition, Section 106 (a) of the Brady Act amended Section 509 (d) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act to specifically provide that funds from the 5% set-aside under the Byrne Formula grant program may be spent for "the improvement of State record systems and the sharing . . . of records . . . for the purposes of implementing . . . (the Brady Act)." The National Child Protection Act of 1993, as amended by the Violent Crime Control Act, requires that records of abuse against children be transmitted to the FBI's national record system. The Act also encourages states to adopt legislation requiring background checks on individuals prior to assuming responsibility for care of children, the elderly, or the disabled. Section 4 of the Act establishes a grant program to assist states in upgrading records to meet the requirements of the Act. Under the definition set forth in Section 5 (3) of the Act, "child abuse crimes" include crimes under any law of the state and are not limited to felonies. Both the Brady and Child Protection Acts required that the Attorney General survey the status of state criminal history records and develop timetables for states to achieve complete and automated records. The survey was conducted during March 1994, and Governors were advised of timetables by the Attorney General in letters of May and June 1994. The letters indicated that compliance with timetable goals assumed availability of grant funds under each Act. The NCHIP program implements the requirements of the grant programs established under both the Brady and Child Protection Acts. In addition to the amendments noted above, Section 40602 of the Violent Crime Control Act authorized a program to assist states in entering data on stalking and domestic violence into local, state, and national data-bases. Although funding was deferred, the Act emphasizes the importance of ensuring that data on convictions for these crimes are included in databases being developed with Federal funds. Appropriation Section 106 (b) of the Brady Act authorized $200 million for the grant program; the Child Protection Act authorized $20 million. An appropriation of $100 million was made to implement Section 106 (b) of the Brady Act for FY 1995, to be available until expended. Of this amount, $6 million is being made available to the FBI for NICS, $1 million is available for Federal agency administration, and $5 million will, consistent with the legislative history, be used to provide technical assistance to states, program coordination, and to undertake a program evaluation. The remaining $88 million will be made available directly to the states. Of this amount, not less than $5 million will be allocated to implement the requirement that preference be given to states with the lowest levels of dispositions in automated records. In light of the overlap between Brady and Child Protection Act goals, funds from this appropriation may be used to meet related goals of the Child Protection Act. Program strategy General To achieve the goals of the NCHIP program, at least one grant will be made to each state with funds appropriated under the Brady Act. Technical assistance will also be provided under BJS grant awards to assist states in identifying areas of weakness, auditing record status, long term planning, and developing and implementing technical and administrative programs. Funds under the Byrne Formula 5% set-aside program will also be available to support the improvement of record systems and to meet the goals of the Brady Act. The NCHIP program includes three components: * Core activities, * Permitted activities in selected states ("extended core activities"), and * Least-advanced "priority" state activities. Core activities Basic system development Core activities focus on establishing and enhancing computerized criminal history (CCH) records and on improving access to and interface between such systems and the national instant criminal background check (NICS) system. The Brady Act does not define the term criminal history record. As defined in 28 CFR part 20, and used in the BJS Criminal History Record Improvement (CHRI) program, however, the term is defined as: "information collected by criminal justice agencies on individuals consisting of identifiable descriptions and notations of arrests, detentions, indictments, information, or other formal criminal charges, and any dispositions arising therefrom, sentencing, correctional supervision, and release. . . ." Specifically, core activities relating to basic system development include efforts to * improve the quality of criminal history records (with emphasis on automation and disposition capture), * increase participation in the FBI's Interstate Identification Index (III), and * upgrade the accessibility of records for presale and preemployment checks (primarily through record flagging). In addition to the above activities relating to basic system development, core activities include the following: Non-felony records Consistent with the Child Protection Act which defines a "child abuse crime" within the context of "a crime committed under any law of a state," NCHIP core activities include efforts to increase system access to non-felony records, particularly in areas relating to child or domestic abuse or crimes against the elderly or disabled. Interface with NIBRS In order to permit states to identify persons with records involving child, elderly, or disabled abuse, NCHIP core activities include efforts to establish an interface between criminal history record systems and any state data system which is compatible with NIBRS. Information on stalking and domestic violence Consistent with Section 40602 of the Violent Crime Control Act, core activities include development of procedures to ensure that information on convictions relating to stalking and domestic abuse are included in, and accessible through, the criminal history database.Research, evaluation, monitoring and audit In order to maximize the utility of information collected as part of the NCHIP program, core activities include continuing efforts to evaluate, audit, or monitor progress in meeting legislative or program goals through statistical or other related means, and specific research studies relating to use of handguns. To ensure program continuity and emphasize criminal history record improvement in support of the NICS, the major portion of funds to be expended for core activities should be retained by the agency with responsibility for CCH records (if that is the agency designated to administer the program) or transferred directly to the agency with such responsibility. The application should indicate clearly the level of funds which will be made available to this agency for this purpose. The application should also indicate the level of funds which will be made directly available to the courts where the courts are the appropriate source for data on dispositions or other record data. Permitted activities in selected states ("extended core activities") In addition to funding core improvements to criminal history records, BJS will provide a limited amount of NCHIP funds (not to exceed $5 million in total) to selected states to assist in the identification of persons other than felons who are prohibited from purchasing firearms under 18 USC 922 (g) and (n), as amended. The purpose of this effort will be to support the long-term goal of the permanent system established under Section 102(b) of the Brady Act by enhancing the effectiveness of the NICS. In addition to previously identified non-computerized criminal history (CCH) categories, the Violent Crime Control Act amended the Brady Act to prohibit firearm purchase by persons subject to a civil restraining order arising out of domestic or child abuse. Such orders, although not technically criminal, are enforced by the criminal justice system, which depends on the availability of data on such persons for implementation. Under the NCHIP "extended core" program, funds can be used to evaluate the feasibility of accessing such records and to develop protocols for interfacing with non-CCH systems for purposes of background checks. BJS will identify those states which are eligible to apply for funds to conduct such activities based on level of CCH development, participation in III, extent of automation and technical development, current efforts to interface with other categories of prohibited firearm purchasers (either within the state or interstate), and experience under the BJS CHRI program. States determined to be eligible will be notified by the end of January 1995. Funds will be in addition to funds provided for core activities, which will be required to be the major focus of the state's NCHIP program. Selected states which wish to apply for funding under this category should include a separate component in their grant application describing such activities and proposing a budget to cover the proposed efforts. This request may be submitted as a supplement or amendment to the basic application. States applying for funds under this section should understand that the goal of these efforts is to demonstrate the feasibility of multi-database interface for background check purposes and that the projects are intended to provide guidance to, and serve as models for, future implementation by other jurisdictions. In particular, it is envisioned that the programs developed with NCHIP funds will serve as models for these efforts and that additional states will subsequently use Byrne 5% set-aside funds to develop system access to non-CCH data. For this reason, applications for funds under this section should include a description of proposed efforts to evaluate the success of activities undertaken and to prepare materials describing the project for exchange with other states. States should also realize that BJS will be documenting these efforts and that the applicant will be expected to provide input as requested by BJS for these materials. In light of the importance of these demonstration programs to the overall BJS NCHIP program, BJS will provide additional technical assistance to the selected states to ensure that, together, the activities being funded will advance the development of the NICS at both the state and Federal level. Least-advanced priority state activities ("priority state activities") Section 106(b) of the Brady Act requires that BJS give "preference to States that, as of the date of enactment . . . have the lowest currency of case dispositions in computerized criminal history files . . . ." To implement this requirement, at least $5 million will be allocated to states in this category. Designated states will also be eligible for priority technical assistance at no cost. The determination of states qualifying under this special provision will be made after release of the 1993 Survey of State CHRI Systems. States will be notified by December 31, 1994. States designated under this category may only use NCHIP funds to support the basic system development components of the core funding activity. Application and award process Eligibility requirements Designation of agency to administer NCHIP program To participate in NCHIP, each state must designate an agency to submit an application and to administer the program. The agency should be the agency with primary responsibility for implementing the major activity to be funded with NCHIP funds or a parent agency with programmatic oversight over, and legislative authority to transfer funds to, such agency. Since the NCHIP program focuses on improvement of criminal records and interface with the NICS, BJS anticipates that, in a large number of cases, the NCHIP agency will have responsibility for maintenance of criminal records and liaison with the FBI and/or other record sources including NIBRS, if existing. As noted below, NCHIP procedures envision that strong state coordination will exist between the NCHIP and Byrne 5% set-aside programs to avoid overlap and maximize funding effectiveness. It is not necessary that the NCHIP agency be the same as the agency with administrative authority over Byrne 5% set-aside funds. The application should indicate the basis for the selection of the NCHIP agency, justified in terms of the organizational posture of the selected agency and its role in meeting the goals of the Brady and Child Protection Acts. Only one application will be accepted from each state for any period of funding. It is the responsibility of the Governor to select the applicant agency. A state may, however, choose to submit its application as part of a multi-state consortium or other entity. In such case, the application should include a statement of commitment from each state and be signed by an individual designated by the Governor of each participating state. The application should also indicate specific responsibilities, and include a separate budget for, each state. States may receive successive awards over time, assuming availability of funds. Program narrative In addition to the requirements set forth in Appendix A, the NCHIP application should include the following four parts: Part I. Background This part should include a discussion of current and previous efforts relating to criminal history record improvement funded under the BJS CHRI program, the BJA Byrne 5% set-aside or with state funds over the past 3 years. The discussion should specify the amount of funds received under the BJS and Byrne programs and the funds remaining at the time of application. The section should also describe accomplishments with previous funding and the relationship to proposed NCHIP activities. A copy of the State plan and the most current update on the use of Byrne 5% set-aside funds, as submitted to BJA, should be appended, along with a copy of any other long term state plans for criminal history record improvement. Part II. Identification of needs This part should discuss audit or other evaluative efforts undertaken to identify the key areas of weakness in the state's criminal record system and in its ability to identify ineligible firearm purchasers or persons ineligible to hold positions involving children, the elderly, or the disabled. Specific reference should be made to relevant studies and to the findings of any internal or external independent audits which have been completed in the past 5 years. Part III. NCHIP effort This part should describe the activities to be undertaken with NCHIP funds over the coming 36 month period. Specifically, each application should indicate the core activities to be undertaken to improve its criminal history system, to initiate or enhance participation in III, to support the state's interface with the NICS, and to meet the timetable established by the Attorney General. The section should also discuss proposed efforts, if any, to identify particular offender types (either through interface with NIBRS or other means); and to ensure that criminal records pertaining to stalking or domestic abuse are included in criminal record databases. Discussions of proposed efforts to upgrade record completeness should indicate whether, and how, the courts or other record providers have been involved in preparation of the application and how funds will be made available to such entities. Part III of the application should also describe the efforts to be supported to monitor state compliance with legislative or programmatic goals through ongoing audits or other means such as statistical analysis, comparison between CCH records and NIBRS or UCR data. Studies relating to handgun use or sales approval, if proposed, should be described in this section. The application should include evidence that, where appropriate, the state Statistical Analysis Center was consulted in connection with the development of such projects. BJS is currently supporting the Firearm Inquiry STatistical ("FIST") program to develop national level data on Brady implementation. BJS will advise states by the end of December 1994 of the scope of this project. In support of the basic elements of this project, however, the application should describe procedures to collect data on the number of Brady inquiries, "hits," and captures (including the total number of queries against databases other than the criminal history record). The application should also indicate procedures for collection of data on the number of background checks on persons seeking positions involving children, the elderly, or the disabled and the number of records with action in the past 5 years which are complete and automated. States receiving NCHIP funds will be required to participate in the FIST effort and to submit other information for evaluation programs instituted under the NCHIP program. Permitted activities in selected states ("extended core activities"): States selected to apply for "extended core" funds, may apply for additional funds to develop, and/or implement procedures to access information on persons other than felons/fugitives who are Federally prohibited from purchasing a firearm. In addition to describing proposed activities, interested states should justify their request for such funding in terms of current CCH development and participation in III, and describe state procedures, if any, for interface between the criminal record system and other relevant databases. (See "allowable costs" for covered expenses in this area.) In order to permit assessment of state progress in meeting grant goals, Part III of all applications should set forth measurable benchmarks or goals for each proposed activity. Part IV. Relationship to Byrne 5% set-aside program This Part should describe activity to be undertaken with Byrne 5% set-aside funds during FY 1995 and 1996. A key part of this submission is a description of the relationship be-tween these activities and the activities to be supported under the NCHIP program. Where the state has previously submitted a 1995 update to BJA, a copy of the submission should be included in this Part to meet this requirement. Alternatively, a copy of the material developed for this Part, may be submitted to BJA as the state's 1995 update, consistent with any other requirements as set forth in the Byrne 5% set-aside Guidelines to be issued. In the latter case, the state should have this section prepared by the agency with responsibility for administering the Byrne funds, rather than the agency designated to administer the NCHIP program. The relationship between the Byrne 5% set-aside and the NCHIP program is discussed more fully below. Coordination between NCHIP and the Byrne 5% set-aside program The Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Justice Assistance have jointly agreed that close and continuing coordination between the NCHIP and Byrne 5% set-aside program is critical to meeting the goals of the Brady Act and the National Child Protection Act of 1993. Such coordinated efforts are also necessary to ensure the development of an effective interstate criminal history record system to meet the needs of law enforcement, the criminal justice community and the increasing number of non-criminal justice users of criminal history record information. To achieve this goal, BJS and BJA will, consistent with the legislative requirements, work together to prepare Guidelines governing use of the Byrne 5% set-aside funds. The Guidelines are expected to be finalized by the end of December 1994. BJS expects that program plans for projects to be funded under NCHIP and the Byrne 5% set-aside will be coordinated by the state agencies responsible for these programs. Where costs of a proposed activity exceed NCHIP available funds or are unallowable under NCHIP, the state might, for example, use Byrne funds to fill remaining needs. This joint effort, we believe, will maximize the effectiveness of both of these programs. Award period The application should cover a 3-year period with specific information provided primarily for the first year. The budget should provide details for first-year expenses and should contain data in required categories for years two and three if applicable (see Appendix A, Application content). The application should identify those agencies to receive direct funding and indicate the fiscal arrangements to accomplish fund transfer. Application submission and due dates The goal of the NCHIP program is to ensure that all states receive funding support. Absent special circumstances, applications should be received by July 1, 1995, to be eligible for FY 1995 funding. Applications may be submitted at any time after publication of this announcement and will be reviewed as received. Based on applications received by January 31, 1995, up to $25 million of funds available for core activities will be awarded by April 15, 1995. This does not include additional awards which may be made from set-asides for "priority" states or states undertaking "extended core" activities. Initial awards may be for partial funding for some states. Partially funded applications will be reconsidered for additional funding at a later date. Since approval of funding under the NCHIP program will be based on proposed activities and the overall availability of appropriations, states submitting applications after the January 31 deadline will not be disadvantaged in overall level of award. If a state which is eligible to apply for "priority state" funding or funding for "extended core activities" has already submitted its application for core activity, the application for additional funds can be submitted as an amendment or a supplement to the original application. Allocation of funds To implement the "preference" requirement of the Brady Act, not less than $5 million will be allocated to provide supplemental funding for the least-advanced "priority" states: $5 million will be set aside to cover the cost of "extended core" activities in the states receiving an award to undertake such projects. $5 million will also be used to cover costs of technical assistance, evaluation and coordination. The remainder of available funds will be allocated to cover the cost of core activities. States may receive funding from the core allocation as well as either the fund for "priority" states or the fund established for "extended core" activity. Including both core funding and supplemental awards from the set-asides, the least advanced "priority" states will receive an aggregate of at least $10 million. Review criteria States should understand that full funding may not be possible for all proposed activities. Allocation of funds will be based on the amount requested and the following factors: (1) the legislatively mandated "preference to states which . . . have the lowest percent currency of dispositions in computerized criminal history files" as of 1993; (2) the extent to which the proposed activities will enable the state to meet the timetables established for the state by the Attorney General; (3) the extent to which improvements in the state system, by virtue of record numbers, levels of technical development, or operating procedures, will have a major impact on availability of records throughout the national system; (4) the proposed use or enhancement of innovative procedures which may be of value to other jurisdictions; (5) the technical feasibility of the proposal and the extent to which the proposal appears reasonable in light of the state's current level of system development and statutory framework; (6) prior activity of the state with funds under the Byrne and CHRI programs; (7) state commitment to the national record system as evidenced by membership in III, and participation in the FBI's National Fingerprint File (NFF), Felon Identification in Firearms Sales (FIFS) programs, etc., and the current status of development of its CCH; (8) reasonableness of the budget; (9) evidence of state progress in meeting record improvement and background check goals as measured in terms of audits, and data collection relating to presale firearm checks and background checks on persons seeking positions involving children, the aged and the disabled; (10) nature of the proposed expenditures; (11) the extent to which the plan reflects constructive interface between relevant components of the state organization and/or multi state systems; and (12) the reasonableness of the relationship between the proposed activities and the current status of the state system, in terms of technical development, legislation, current fiscal demands, and future operating costs. The program does not require either "hard" (cash) or "soft" (in-kind) match. Indications of state support, however, may be interpreted as expressions of commitment by the state to the program. All applicants must agree to participate in evaluations sponsored by the federal government. Applicants must also agree to provide data relating to Brady Act activity to the Firearm Inquiry STatistics (FIST) program in the format designated by the FIST program. Allowable costs To the extent possible, awards will be made to cover all allowable costs. States receiving funds from the allocation for "priority" states, however, will be required to limit expenditures to purposes directly related to establishment of the basic elements of the criminal history record system and steps necessary to permit participation in III. Among the remaining states, use of funds for non-CCH purposes will be approved only to the extent that the state is making progress toward the improvement of the criminal history record system and interface with the III. Allowable expenses are detailed below. All expenses are allowable only to the extent that they directly relate to programs described in the application's program narrative. Core activities (1) Participation in the Interstate Identification Index (III): This is a key goal, and costs should be related to achieving full participation. Covered costs include, but are not limited to, costs associated with automation of the database (see limitations in (4) below), synchronization of records between state and FBI, and development of necessary software and hardware enabling electronic access on an intrastate or interstate basis. (2) Database enhancement: Improving the quality, completeness and accuracy of criminal history records is a key goal of the NCHIP effort. Allowable costs include the costs associated with implementing improved record capture procedures, establishing more effective accuracy controls, and ensuring that records of all criminal events that start with an arrest or indictment are included in the database. In addition to felony records, limited funds may be used to capture data on serious misdemeanors, and to ensure that data on persons convicted of stalking and/or domestic abuse are included in the database. Use of funds for capture of data on misdemeanors and persons convicted of stalking will only be approved where the state has, or is actively undertaking efforts to upgrade, the basic elements of the criminal history record system. (3) Improved disposition capture: Automated interface between the criminal history repository and the courts, prosecutors, and/or corrections agencies is encouraged. Funds provided to courts or prosecutors for these purposes are allowable only to the extent that the function to be supported is related to the capture of disposition or other data relating to the offender record (for example, full costs associated with establishment of court MIS systems are not allowable under the NCHIP program). (4) Record automation: These are allowable costs only with respect to records where the subject has been arrested, indicted, convicted, or released from confinement within 5 years of the date of automation. As appropriate, allowable costs also include costs associated with system design in states with non-automated systems or in states proposing to enhance system operation to include access to non-CCH databases. (5) Flagging of records: This is an important activity. Allowable costs include costs of flagging, or algorithms used for flagging, felony records and records of persons with convictions for crimes involving children, the elderly and/or the disabled. Costs may include the cost of technical record flagging as well as the costs associated with identification of records to be flagged (see (7) below regarding interface with NIBRS). (6) AFIS/livescan: Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS)/livescan equipment for local law enforcement agencies is allowable to improve the level of arrest and disposition reporting, but only where-- (1) the state repository system is automated, participating or looking toward participation in III, and has in place the technical capability to accept AFIS transmissions, and (2) sufficient traffic can be demonstrated to justify the cost, possibly through the use of regional systems. AFIS/livescan in squad cars is not allowable since field inquiries are not a factor in checks under either the Brady Act or the Child Protection Act. Additionally, since data are not generally input to the system by the field unit, AFIS in the squad car would not support record improvement or completeness. AFIS/livescan for use in courts is allowable to support record completeness. The same conditions regarding repository capability and levels of traffic are also applicable to costs in this category. Costs associated with AFIS/livescan communication from the repository to the FBI national system (IAFIS) are allowable but only where the state can demonstrate adequate levels of record completeness (both arrest and disposition) and current membership in III. States should understand that Byrne 5% set-aside funds are available for AFIS/livescan, and that, accordingly, use of NCHIP funds for AFIS or livescan will only be allowable when justified as appropriate given the overall status of the state system, its participation in the national system and its planned use of Byrne 5% set-aside funds. This is particularly relevant as respects state proposals to use NCHIP funds to cover costs of local livescan equipment. (7) Interface with NIBRS: Funds may be used to interface with any state data system which is compatible with NIBRS for purposes of identifying persons convicted of crimes against children, the elderly, or the disabled, and/or identification of records involving firearm crimes for operational or research purposes. NCHIP funds are not available, however, to develop the NIBRS database. (8) Research, evaluation, monitoring and audits: Costs associated with research or evaluation efforts are allowable to the extent that they are directly associated with a project approved in the application. Costs associated with monitoring state compliance with legislative or programmatic goals, through ongoing or periodic audits or other procedures, are allowable and encouraged. The purchase of equipment such as modems and the necessary communications and data software for storing and transmitting evaluative data between states and to BJS or other designated federal agencies is an allowable expense. (9) Conversion of juvenile records to the adult system: The Attorney General has recently amended Federal Regulations to allow the FBI to accept juvenile records if submitted by the state or local arresting agency. Expenditures to interface juvenile and adult records are allowable if consistent with relevant state law and undertaken to further the goals of the NCHIP program. (10) Missing dispositions backlog reduction: These costs are allowable to improve the level of disposition reporting but only where limited to records with arrests within the past 5 years. States must also propose a strategy to prevent future backlogs from developing. (11) Equipment upgrades: Upgrade costs are allowable where related to improving availability of data and where appropriate given the level of data completeness, participation in III, etc. Replacement costs will be considered but states are encouraged to contribute some portion of the total costs. (12) Training, participation in seminars and meetings: Limited funds may be used to cover costs of training and participation in state, regional, or national seminars or conferences (including travel, where necessary). (13) Expenditures related to presale handgun background checks: Funds are allowable to cover costs incurred by a governmental agency for equipment or development of capability required to conduct presale background checks. This "governmental agency" limitation may be waived in a very limited number of cases where the state has implemented a functioning background check system and can demonstrate that the vast preponderance of inquiries are made by a limited number of dealers, that technical and procedural safeguards have been established to protect the privacy of potential purchasers, and that the equipment to be provided to dealers would be of use for operation under the permanent system. Waivers will only be considered in states which are participants in III and which have achieved high levels of automation and record completeness. NCHIP funds may not be used to cover costs of conducting presale background checks. "Extended core" expenditures Interface with non-CCH databases: Costs associated with developing access to, and interface between, databases on persons other than felons who are ineligible to purchase a firearm are allowed. Such costs include, but are not limited to, costs of investigating the existence and completeness of other databases, identifying problems in accessing and interfacing with such data-bases, and developing and implementing protocols for accessing these categories of data, and, where appropriate, incorporating such data into criminal history record data systems. Costs of documenting these projects and presenting results thereof are also allowable. Costs in this category are allowable only for those selected states that receive a grant to conduct "extended core" activities. APPENDIX A APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS Application content All applicants must submit: * Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance * Standard Form 424A, Budget Information * OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1-93), Program Narrative and Assurances * OJP Form 4061/6 Certifications * OJP Form 7120/1 (Rev. 1-93), Accounting System and Financial Capability Questionnaire (to be submitted by applicants who have not previously received Federal funds). Applicants are requested to submit an original and two copies of the application and certifications to the following address: Application Coordinator Bureau of Justice Statistics 633 Indiana Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20531 Phone: (202) 616-3500 Standard Form 424 (SF-424). The SF-424, a one page sheet with 18 items, serves as a cover sheet for the entire application. This form is required for every application for Federal assistance. No application can be accepted without a completed, signed original SF-424. Directions to complete each item are included on the back of the form. Standard Form 424A (SF-424A). All applications must include SF- 424A, Budget Information for all years of project activity. Applicants should ensure that all appropriate columns and rows balance. Directions to complete this form are found on page 3 of SF-424A. Detailed budget. Applicants must provide a detailed justification for all costs including the basis for computation of these costs. For example, the detailed budget would include the salaries of staff involved in the project and the portion of those salaries to be paid from the award; fringe benefits paid to each staff person; travel costs related to the project; equipment to be purchased with the award funds; and supplies required to complete the project. Budget narrative. The budget narrative closely follows the content of the detailed budget. The narrative should relate the items budgeted to specific tasks and allowable cost categories and should provide a justification and explanation for the budgeted items including the criteria and data used to arrive at the estimates for each budget category. Please note applications that include noncompetitive contracts for the provision of specific services must contain a sole source justification for any procurement in excess of $25,000. The budget narrative should indicate amounts to be made available to agencies other than the grant recipient (for example, the agency with responsibility for CCH, the courts, local agencies.) Program narrative. All applications must include a program narrative which fully describes the expected design and implementation of the proposed program. OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev. 1-93) provides additional detailed instructions for preparing the program narrative. The narrative should include a timeline of activities indicating, for each proposed activity, the projected duration of the activity, expected completion date, and any products expected. The application should include a description of the roles and responsibilities of key organizational and/or functional components involved in project activities; and a list of key personnel responsible for managing and implementing the major elements of the program. Assurances. OJP Form 4000/3 (Rev 1-93) must be included in the application submission. If submitting this form separate from the SF-424, the applicant must sign and date the form to certify compliance with the Federal statutes, regulations, and requirements as cited. Certification Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace. Applicants should refer to the regulations cited in OJP Form, 4061/6 to determine the certification to which they are required to attest. A copy of OJP Form 4061/6 can be obtained from the BJS Application Coordinator. Applicants should also review the instructions for certification included in the regulations before completing this form. Signature of this form provides for compliance with certification requirements under 28 CFR Part 69, "New Restrictions on Lobbying," and 28 CFR Part 67, "Government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)." The certifications shall be treated as a material representation of fact upon which reliance will be placed when the U.S. Department of Justice determines to award the covered transaction, grant, or cooperative agreement. Financial and administrative requirements Discretionary grants are governed by the provisions of OMB Circulars applicable to financial assistance. The circulars, with additional information and guidance, are contained in the "Financial and Administrative Guide for Grants," Office of Justice Programs, Guideline Manual, M7100, available from the Office of Justice Programs. This guideline manual, provided upon request, is intended to assist grantees in the administration of funds and includes information on allowable costs, methods of payment, Federal rights of access to records, audit requirements, accounting systems, and financial records. Complete and accurate information is required relative to the application, expenditure of funds, and program performance. The consequences of failure to comply with program guidelines and requirements will be determined at the discretion of the Department. Civil rights obligations All applicants for Federal financial assistance must sign Certified Assurances that they are in compliance with the Federal laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in any program or activity that receives such Federal funds. Section 809(c), Omnibus Crime Control & Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 3789d, provides that: No person in any State shall on the ground of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in connection with any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds made available under this title. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. The applicant agency must discuss how it will ensure nondiscriminatory practices as they relate to: (1) Delivery of services or benefits--to ensure that individuals will not be denied access to services or benefits under the program or activity on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, age, or disability; (2) Employment practices--to ensure that its personnel in the program or activity are selected for employment without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, gender, age, or disability; and (3) Program participation--to ensure members of any planning, steering or advisory board, which is an integral part of the program or activity, are not excluded from participation on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, age or disability; and to encourage the selection of such members who are reflective of the diversity in the community to be served. Audit requirement In October 1984, Congress passed the Single Audit Act of 1984. On April 12, 1985, the Office of Management and Budget issued Circular A-128, "Audits of State and Local Governments" which establishes regulations to implement the Act. OMB Circular A-128, "Audits of State and Local Governments," outlines the requirements for organizational audits which apply to BJS grantees. Disclosure of Federal participation Section 8136 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (Stevens Amendment), enacted in October 1988, requires that, "when issuing statements, press releases for proposals, bid solicitations, and other documents describing projects or programs funded in whole or in part with Federal money, all grantees receiving Federal funds, including but not limited to State and local governments, shall clearly state (1) the percentage of the total cost of the program or project which will be financed with Federal money, and (2) the dollar amount of Federal funds for the project or program." Intergovernmental review of Federal programs Federal Executive Order 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs," allows States to establish a process for reviewing Federal programs in the State, to choose which programs they wish to review, to conduct such reviews, and to make their views known to the funding Federal agency through a State "single point of contact." If the State has established a "single point of contact," and if the State has selected this program to be included in its review process, the applicant must send a copy of its letter or application to the State "single point of contact" at the same time that it is submitted to BJS. The letter or application submitted to BJS must indicate that this has been done. The State must complete its review within 60 days. The review period will begin on the date that the letter or application is officially received by BJS. If BJS does not receive comments from the State's "single point of contact" by the end of the review period, this will be interpreted as a "no comment" response. If the State has not established a "single point of contact," or if it has not selected the BJS statistics development or criminal history improvement programs in its review process, this must be stated in the letter or application. END OF FILE (the application forms are not included in this text file) Appendix B Application forms U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director Contents Summary 1 Program goals 1 Legislative background 2 Appropriation 3 Program strategy 4 Application and award process 6 Allowable costs 10 Appendix A. Application and administrative requirements 15 Appendix B. Application forms 21 Foreword This program announcement demonstrates the Justice Department's continuing commitment to building an accurate and useful national system of criminal records. The Federal Bureau of Investigation began this effort in 1924, with the establishment of its Identification Division which stores fingerprint-based information about both Federal offenders and arrests and dispositions under State laws. The FBI's latest developments related to this system include the Interstate Identification Index, which routes electronic search inquiries from criminal justice agencies nationwide to the appropriate State or Federal database containing the criminal history record. Later, in 1972, the Bureau of Justice Statistics' predecessor agency began to help States manage and use their criminal history records. By providing grant awards and technical assistance to States under the Criminal History Improvement Program and by sponsoring task forces, research studies, and evaluations, BJS has stimulated the ongoing nationwide effort that is increasing the extent of computerization and completeness of criminal history records. Then, beginning in 1991, the Bureau of Justice Assistance has also been involved in improving criminal history records though its administration of grants to States for criminal justice record systems which are part of the Byrne formula grant program. The importance of improving criminal history records cannot be overstated. While fingerprint-based "rap" sheets have long been vital for criminal investigations, in recent years criminal history records have been playing increasing roles in identifying serious offenders under various State and federal statutes, for making bail and pretrial release decisions, for sentencing determinations, and for correctional supervision and release decisions. The volume of non-criminal uses has been growing rapidly; these include background checks for licensing, pre-employment screening, and security clearances. Availability of accurate and complete criminal records is especially critical to the task of identifying persons who are ineligible to purchase firearms. The National Criminal History Improvement Program announced in this booklet will not only strengthen the nation's capabilities to identify felons who attempt to purchase firearms but will also begin the process of building a national system (the National Instant Criminal Background Check system) which will also permit identifying persons other than felons who are ineligible to purchase firearms. At the same time, recent legislation expands the role of criminal history records in protecting children, the elderly, and the disabled from abuse, and the NCHIP program will also help advance these efforts. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics