[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 107 (Wednesday, June 4, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33604-33609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-14035]
[[Page 33603]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Justice
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Announcement for the Internet Crimes Against Children Task
Force Program; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 4, 2003 /
Notices
[[Page 33604]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
[OJP (OJJDP) Docket No. 1376]
Program Announcement for the Internet Crimes Against Children
Task Force Program
AGENCY: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office
of Justice Programs, Justice.
ACTION: Notice of solicitation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(OJJDP) is requesting applications from state and local law enforcement
agencies interested in participating in the Internet Crimes Against
Children (ICAC) Task Force Program. In an effort to expand ICAC
Regional Task Force coverage to areas that do not currently have an
ICAC Regional Task Force presence, this solicitation is limited to
State and local law enforcement agencies in the following states and
localities: Arkansas; New Jersey; northern Florida;\1\ the Los Angeles,
California, metropolitan area;\2\ and the northern Virginia/Washington,
DC metropolitan area (excluding Maryland).\3\ Only one grant will be
awarded per State/locality listed above. This program encourages
communities to develop regional multidisciplinary, multijurisdictional
task forces to prevent, interdict, and investigate sexual exploitation
offenses committed by offenders who use online technology to victimize
children.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purpose of this solicitation, northern Florida is
defined as counties and cities north of, and including, Hillsborough
County, Indian River County, Osceola County, and Polk County.
\2\ For the purpose of this solicitation, the Los Angeles
metropolitan area is defined as cities and towns within, and
including, Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County, San
Bernardino County, and Ventura County.
\3\ For the purpose of this solicitation, the northern Virginia/
Washington, DC, metropolitan area (excluding Maryland) is defined as
the cities of Washington, DC; Alexandria, Virginia; and Falls
Church, Virginia, and the cities and towns in Virginia within, and
including, Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince
William County, and Stafford County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Applications must be received by July 7, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Holloway, 202-305-9838, ICAC
Program Manager, Child Protection Division, Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose
Due to an increase in funding, this solicitation is being extended
to further expand the ICAC Task Force program to provide national
coverage beyond that established through grants awarded under this
program in 2002. Funding the specific states and regions identified in
this solicitation will further this goal.
The purpose of this program is to help state and local law
enforcement agencies enhance their investigative response to offenders
who use the Internet, online communication systems, or other computer
technologies to sexually exploit children. Throughout this program
announcement, ``Internet crimes against children'' refers to the sexual
exploitation of children that is facilitated by computers and includes
crimes of child pornography and online solicitation for sexual
purposes.
Background
Unlike some adults who view the benefits of the Information Age
dubiously, children and teenagers have seized the Internet's
educational and recreational opportunities with astonishing speed.
Adapting information technology to meet everyday needs, young people
are increasingly going online to meet friends, get information,
purchase goods and services, and complete school assignments.
Currently, 28 million children and teenagers have access to the
Internet; industry experts predict that they will be joined by another
50 million globally by 2005. Although the Internet gives children and
teenagers access to valuable resources, it also increases their risk of
being sexually exploited or victimized.
When online, large numbers of young people encounter sexual
solicitations they do not want and sexual material they do not seek. In
the most serious cases, they are targeted by offenders seeking children
for sex. Research conducted by the University of New Hampshire revealed
that one in five children between ages 10 and 17 received a sexual
solicitation over the Internet in 1999. One in 33 received an
aggressive solicitation from someone who asked to meet them somewhere,
called them on the telephone, or sent them mail, money, or gifts.
Cloaked in the anonymity of cyberspace, sex offenders can
capitalize on the natural curiosity of children and seek victims with
little risk of detection. Preferential sex offenders no longer need to
lurk in parks and malls. Instead, they can roam from chat room to chat
room, trolling for children susceptible to victimization. This alarming
activity has grave implications for parents, teachers, and law
enforcement officers because it circumvents conventional safeguards and
provides sex offenders with virtually unlimited opportunities for
unsupervised contact with children.
Today's Internet is also rapidly becoming the new marketplace for
offenders seeking to acquire material for their child pornography
collections. Child pornography depicts the sexual assault of children
and is often used by child molesters to recruit, seduce, and control
their victims. Child pornography is used to break down inhibitions,
validate sex between children and adults as normal, and control victims
throughout their molestation. When offenders lose interest in their
victims, child pornography is often used as blackmail to ensure the
child's silence; when posted on the Internet, pornography becomes an
enduring and irretrievable record of victimization and a relentless
violation of that child's privacy.
OJJDP recognizes that the increasing online presence of children,
the lure of predators searching for unsupervised contact with underage
victims, and the proliferation of child pornography present a
significant threat to the health and safety of children and a
formidable challenge to law enforcement today and into the foreseeable
future. Three main factors complicate law enforcement's response to
these challenges.
First, conventional definitions of jurisdiction are practically
meaningless in the electronic universe of cyberspace; very few
investigations begin and end within the same geographical area. Because
they involve multiple jurisdictions, most investigations require close
coordination and cooperation between Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies.
Second, evidence collection in ICAC investigations typically
requires specialized expertise and equipment. Because preferential sex
offenders tend to be avid recordkeepers, their computers, magnetic
media, and related equipment can be valuable sources of evidence.
However, routine forensic examination procedures are insufficient for
seizing, preserving, and analyzing this information. In addition, the
seizure of computers and related technology may lead to specific legal
issues regarding property and privacy rights.
Third, routine interviewing practices are inadequate for collecting
testimonial evidence from child victims of Internet crimes. Some
children deny they are victims because they fear embarrassment,
ridicule from their peers, or discipline from their parents. Other
victims bond with the offender, remain susceptible to further
manipulation, or resent what they perceive as interference from law
enforcement. Investigators who do not
[[Page 33605]]
fully understand the dynamics of juvenile sexual exploitation risk
losing critical information that could help convict perpetrators or
identify additional victims. When appropriate, medical and
psychological evaluations should be a part of law enforcement's
response to cases involving child victims. In addition to ensuring that
injuries or diseases related to the victimization are treated, forensic
medical examinations provide crucial corroborative evidence.
The above factors almost routinely complicate the investigative
process. Although no two cases raise identical issues of jurisdiction,
evidence collection, and victim services, it is logical to presume that
investigations characterized by a multijurisdictional,
multidisciplinary approach will more likely result in successful
prosecutions.
A variety of Federal activities are helping and can further help
law enforcement respond to these offenses. For example, the Innocent
Images National initiative, managed by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's (FBI's) Cyber Division, Innocent Images Unit, works
specifically on cases involving computer-facilitated child sexual
exploitation. The U.S. Customs Service (USCS) and the U.S. Postal
Inspection Service (USPIS) have successfully investigated hundreds of
child pornography cases.
The Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) of the U.S.
Department of Justice prosecutes Federal violations and offers advice
and litigation support to Federal, State, and local prosecutors working
on child pornography and sexual exploitation cases.
With support from OJJDP and private-sector funding, the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) serves as the
nation's primary resource center and clearinghouse for issues involving
missing and exploited children. NCMEC's Training Division coordinates a
comprehensive training and technical assistance program that includes
prevention and awareness activities. Gathering information from
citizens and Internet service providers, the CyberTipline (http://www.missingkids.com) collects online reports regarding the computer-
facilitated sexual exploitation of children and rapidly forwards this
information to the law enforcement agencies with investigative
jurisdiction. Brought online in March 1998, the CyberTipline has
provided law enforcement officers with information that has enabled
them to arrest individuals seeking sex with underage victims and to
safely recover and return children enticed from home by sex offenders.
NCMEC's law enforcement training and technical assistance program
was developed in partnership with OJJDP, the FBI, USCS, USPIS, and
CEOS. NCMEC has also developed an education and awareness campaign that
features the Kids and Company curriculum, the Know the Rules teen
awareness program, and two pamphlets (Child Safety on the Information
Highway and Teen Safety on the Information Highway) that provide
information about safe Internet practices for children and youth. These
programs and materials are offered free of charge, and OJJDP encourages
communities working on child victimization issues to use them.
Additional information about NCMEC's services for children, parents,
educators, and law enforcement officers can be obtained by calling 800-
THE-LOST or by accessing NCMEC's Web site at http://www.missingkids.com.
Since fiscal year 1998, OJJDP has awarded funds to 35 State and
local law enforcement agencies to develop regional multijurisdictional
and multiagency task forces to prevent, interdict, and investigate ICAC
offenses. The following jurisdictions currently receive ICAC Regional
Task Force Program funding: Alabama Department of Public Safety;
Bedford County, Virginia, Sheriff's Department; Broward County,
Florida, Sheriff's Department; Clark County, Nevada, Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department; Colorado Springs, Colorado, Police
Department; Connecticut State Police; Cuyahoga County, Ohio, District
Attorney; Dallas, Texas, Police Department; Delaware County,
Pennsylvania, District Attorney; Georgia Bureau of Investigation;
Hawaii Office of the Attorney General; Illinois State Police; Indiana
State Police; Kentucky State Police; Knoxville, Tennessee, Police
Department; Louisiana Office of the Attorney General; Maryland State
Police; Massachusetts Department of Public Safety; Michigan State
Police; Nebraska State Patrol; New York State Division of Criminal
Justice Services; North Carolina Division of Criminal Investigation;
Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation; Phoenix, Arizona, Police
Department; Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Police Department; Sacramento
County, California, Sheriff's Office; Saint Paul, Minnesota, Police
Department; San Diego, California, Police Department; San Jose,
California, Police Department; Seattle, Washington, Police Department;
Sedgewick County, Kansas, Sheriff's Office; South Carolina Office of
the Attorney General; Utah Office of the Attorney General; Wisconsin
Department of Justice; and the Wyoming Division of Criminal
Investigation. These agencies have become regional clusters of ICAC
technical and investigative expertise, offering prevention and
investigation services to children, parents, educators, law enforcement
officers, and other individuals working on child sexual exploitation
issues. Collectively, task force agencies have made more than 800
arrests, seized more than 900 computers, and provided forensic or
investigative assistance in nearly 3,000 cases.
Despite these accomplishments, law enforcement agencies continue to
be increasingly challenged by sex offenders who use computer technology
to victimize children. To help meet this challenge, OJJDP is continuing
the ICAC Regional Task Force Program, which will competitively award
cooperative agreements to state and local law enforcement agencies
seeking to improve their investigative responses to the computer-
facilitated sexual exploitation of children.
Program Strategy
The ICAC Task Force Program seeks to enhance the nationwide
response to child victimization by maintaining and expanding a State
and local law enforcement network composed of regional task forces. The
program encourages communities to develop multijurisdictional,
multiagency responses and provides funding to State and local law
enforcement agencies to help them acquire the knowledge, personnel, and
specialized equipment needed to prevent, interdict, and investigate
ICAC offenses. Although the ICAC Task Force Program emphasizes law
enforcement investigations, OJJDP encourages jurisdictions to include
intervention, prevention, and victim services activities as part of
their comprehensive approach.
OJJDP Program Management
During the past four years of managing the ICAC Task Force Program,
OJJDP has made the following observations:
1. The Internet challenges traditional thinking about law
enforcement jurisdiction and renders city, county, and State boundaries
virtually meaningless. Because of this jurisdictional ambiguity,
offenders are often able to frustrate enforcement actions and conceal
their criminal activities.
2. Nearly all ICAC investigations (95 percent) involve substantial
communication and coordination efforts among Federal, State, and local
law
[[Page 33606]]
enforcement agencies. Without meaningful case coordination, law
enforcement agencies may inadvertently investigate identical suspects
and organizations, target undercover operatives of other law
enforcement agencies, or disrupt clandestine investigations of other
agencies.
[sbull] The obvious need for interagency cooperation and
coordination has sustained interest in maintaining standards for ICAC
undercover investigations. Representatives from Federal, State, and
local law enforcement agencies have repeatedly expressed concern about
initiating investigations that are based on referrals from outside
agencies--referrals that may be predicated on information acquired
through inappropriate officer conduct or investigative techniques.
[sbull] The clandestine nature of undercover operations, the
anonymity of Internet users, and the unclear jurisdictional boundaries
of cyberspace significantly exacerbate these investigative concerns.
Undercover operations, when executed and documented properly, collect
virtually unassailable evidence regarding a suspect's predilection to
sexually exploit children. These operations allow law enforcement
agencies to go on the offensive and, most important, protect children
from revictimization. Although carefully managed undercover operations
by well-trained officers can be very effective, these operations also
generate concerns regarding legal, coordination, communication, and
resource management issues.
3. Although Internet awareness appears to be growing, many
children, teenagers, and parents are not sufficiently informed about
the potential dangers and repercussions of releasing personal
information to, or meeting with, individuals encountered online.
4. Although Federal agencies are responsible for monitoring illegal
interstate and telecommunications activities, protecting children is
primarily the responsibility of State and local law enforcement
agencies. The production of child pornography or the sexual assault of
a child--whether originating online or not--usually creates both a
jurisdictional interest and a responsibility for State and local
authorities.
[sbull] Despite the belief that these cases are usually
manufactured by undercover operations in which officers pose as minors
in chat rooms, most ICAC investigations are initiated in response to a
citizen complaint or a request from law enforcement. Unfortunately,
these cases often involve multiple victims who require a response by
both local law enforcement and victim services.
5. The Internet is placing a new demand on forensic resources.
Computers are piling up in evidence rooms across the country because
many agencies do not have the forensic capacity to meet the needs of
investigative efforts.
6. A generation ago, officers beginning their law enforcement
careers would be issued a uniform, a service weapon, and a notebook.
Those items rarely changed during a 20-year career. Today, changes in
equipment and software occur seemingly overnight. Officers are hard-
pressed to stay current not only with the technological changes but
also with a motivated offender community that is adapting these new
technologies to exploit children.
To address these observations and concerns, the ICAC Task Force
Program implements the following management strategies:
[sbull] Maintaining and expanding the nationwide network of State
and local law enforcement agencies participating in the program.
[sbull] Ensuring that ICAC Task Force personnel are adequately
trained and equipped.
[sbull] Establishing and/or maintaining ICAC Task Force
investigative standards to facilitate interagency case referrals.
[sbull] Advocating coordination and collaboration among Federal,
State, and local law enforcement agencies investigating ICAC offenses.
[sbull] Fostering meaningful information-sharing to avoid redundant
investigations or activities that could disrupt the ongoing
investigations of other agencies.
[sbull] Maintaining an ICAC Task Force Board composed of local law
enforcement executives and prosecutors to advise OJJDP, formulate
policy recommendations, and assess the law enforcement community's
needs for training and technical assistance related to investigating
Internet crimes.
[sbull] Convening an annual ICAC Task Force training conference to
focus on child exploitation, emerging technology, and its relevance to
criminal activity and enforcement efforts and to enhance the networking
essential for sustaining an effective State and local law enforcement
response to online crime.
OJJDP established the ICAC Task Force Program Standards through a
collaborative process involving the ten original ICAC Task Force
agencies, the FBI, NCMEC, USCS, USPIS, CEOS, and the Executive Office
for United States Attorneys. The standards were designed by the task
force agencies to foster information-sharing, coordinate
investigations, ensure the probative quality of undercover operations,
and facilitate interagency case referrals by standardizing
investigative practices. In 2002, the ICAC standards were revised and
updated to reflect twenty additional ICAC Regional Task Forces and an
expanded program focus on the protection of children.
OJJDP has also established an ICAC Task Force Board (the Board) to
help administer the ICAC Task Force Program. As a condition of the
award, each grantee must designate a policy-level law enforcement
official or prosecutor to be a Board member. Although its primary
responsibility is to serve as an advisory group to OJJDP, the Board
also encourages case coordination and facilitates information-sharing
on trends, innovative investigative techniques, and prosecution
strategies. Technical advice is provided to the Board by NCMEC, CEOS,
the FBI, USCS, and USPIS.
The award also requires that each ICAC Regional Task Force member
send at least one investigator and one policy-level official to an ICAC
Task Force Program orientation seminar. The seminars, which were
developed by OJJDP and NCMEC in consultation with Federal law
enforcement agencies, provide information on legal issues, specific
investigative techniques, undercover operation documentation
requirements, behavioral characteristics of preferential sex offenders,
and other topics relevant to child exploitation cases.
To learn about the next seminar scheduled at NCMEC's Jimmy Ryce Law
Enforcement Training Center in Alexandria, VA, contact NCMEC at http://www.missingkids.com. Expenses associated with attendance at the
orientation seminar will be reimbursed by OJJDP and NCMEC. Expenses
associated with Board responsibilities will be covered by grant funds.
Goal
The program's goal is to enhance the ICAC investigative response of
State and local law enforcement agencies.
Objectives
Projects must accomplish the following objectives:
[sbull] Develop or expand multiagency, multijurisdictional regional
task forces that include, but are not limited to, representatives from
law enforcement, prosecution, victim services, and child protective
services agencies. Regional task forces should include large regional
geographic areas, entire States, or, when applicable, multiple States.
Relevant nongovernment organizations may also
[[Page 33607]]
be included. OJJDP encourages applicants to invite Federal law
enforcement agencies to participate in the task force.
[sbull] Institute policies and procedures that comply with the ICAC
Task Force Program Standards (see ``OJJDP Program Management'' above).
Requests from eligible law enforcement agencies for copies of the ICAC
Program Operational and Investigative Standards must be faxed on
official letterhead to the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 301-519-
5600.
[sbull] Enhance investigative capacity by properly equipping and
training ICAC Task Force investigators. Task force investigators should
be computer-literate, knowledgeable about child exploitation issues,
and familiar with Federal and State statutes and caselaw pertaining to
ICAC investigations.
[sbull] Develop and maintain case management systems to record
offenses and investigative results, make or receive outside agency
referrals of ICAC cases, and comply with the reporting requirements of
the ICAC Task Force Monthly Performance Measures Report.
[sbull] Develop response protocols or memorandums of understanding
that foster collaboration, information-sharing, and service integration
among public and private organizations that provide services to
sexually exploited children.
Eligibility Requirements
Applicants must be State and/or local law enforcement agencies
located in Arkansas; New Jersey; northern Florida; \4\ the Los Angeles,
California, metropolitan area,\5\ or the northern Virginia/Washington,
DC, metropolitan area (excluding Maryland).\6\ Joint applications from
two or more eligible applicants are welcome; however, one applicant
must be clearly designated as the primary applicant (for
correspondence, award, and management purposes) and the other(s)
designated as coapplicant(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For the purpose of this solicitation, northern Florida is
defined as counties and cities north of, and including, Hillsborough
County, Indian River County, Osceola County, and Polk County.
\5\ For the purpose of this solicitation, the Los Angeles
metropolitan area is defined as cities and towns within, and
including, Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County, San
Bernardino County, and Ventura County.
\6\ For the purpose of this solicitation, the northern Virginia/
Washington, DC, metropolitan area (excluding Maryland) is defined as
the cities of Washington, DC; Alexandria, Virginia; and Falls
Church, Virginia, and the cities and towns in Virginia within, and
including: Arlington County, Fairfax County, Loudoun County, Prince
William County, and Stafford County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selection Criteria
OJJDP is committed to establishing a network of state and local law
enforcement agencies to respond to offenses involving online enticement
and child pornography. Within this network, ICAC Task Forces positioned
throughout the country will serve as regional sources of technical,
educational, and investigative expertise, providing assistance to
parents, teachers, law enforcement officers, and other professionals
working on child sexual exploitation issues. Successful applicants will
be expected to serve as regional clusters of ICAC technical and
investigative expertise, collaborate with existing ICAC Task Forces,
and become part of a nationwide law enforcement network designed to
protect children from computer-facilitated victimization. To accomplish
this goal, regional task forces should include large regional
geographic areas, entire States, or, when applicable, multiple States.
Applications should include evidence of multidisciplinary,
multijurisdictional partnerships among public agencies, private
organizations, community-based groups, and prosecutors' offices.
Successful applicants will develop or enhance an investigative ICAC
response that includes prevention, education, and victim services
activities.
OJJDP will convene a peer review panel to evaluate and rank
applications and to make funding recommendations to the OJJDP
Administrator. Although peer review recommendations are given weight,
they are advisory only. Final award decisions will be made by the OJJDP
Administrator. OJJDP will negotiate the specific terms of the award
with applicants who are being considered. Applicants will be evaluated
and rated according to the criteria outlined below.
Application Procedures
The Office of Justice Programs (OJP) requires that applications be
submitted through its online Grants Management System (GMS). This
online application system is designed to streamline the processing of
requests for funding. A toll-free telephone number (888-549-9901) is
available to provide applicants with technical assistance as they work
through the online application process.
Applicants should use the following application guidelines when
preparing their application for this grant program. Applications must
be submitted to OJP electronically through GMS no later than 8 p.m.,
e.t., on July 7, 2003. However, in order to allow adequate time to
register with GMS, applicants must create a ``user profile'' before
June 19, 2003. Applicants who have previously registered with GMS and
have a GMS password should log on to GMS prior to June 19, 2003, to
determine whether the password is still valid. If the password has
expired, follow the on-screen instructions or call the GMS Hotline
(888-549-9901). OJJDP will begin accepting applications immediately.
Application Requirements
Applicants to the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force
Program solicitation must submit the following information online
through GMS:
[sbull] Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424). This form is
generated by completing the Overview, Applicant Information, and
Project Information screens in GMS.
[sbull] Assurances and Certifications. The Assurances and
Certifications must be reviewed and accepted electronically by the
authorizing official or the designated authorizing official.
[sbull] Budget Detail Worksheet (Attachment #1). The Budget Detail
Worksheet--including budget worksheets and detailed budget narratives
for each year in the project period--accounts for 15 of the possible
100 points allotted by the peer reviewers.
[sbull] Program Narrative (Attachment #2). The Program Narrative--
including Problem(s) To Be Addressed, Goals and Objectives, Project
Design, and Management and Organizational Capability--accounts for 85
out of the possible 100 points allotted by the peer reviewers. Point
values for specific sections of the Program Narrative are as follows:
Problem(s) To Be Addressed (10 points), Goals and Objectives (10
points), Project Design (35 points), and Management and Organizational
Capability (30 points).
[sbull] Other Program Attachments (Attachment #3). The Other
Program Attachments--including resumes of key personnel and a project
timeline--will not be included in the peer reviewers' scoring of the
application. However, these materials are required and must be attached
in one file to your GMS application.
Detailed instructions and descriptions of each of the required
elements are provided below. Note: Applications that do not include all
the required elements will not be considered for funding.
Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)
The Application for Federal Assistance is a standard form used by
most Federal agencies. The Catalog of
[[Page 33608]]
Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for this program is 16.543.
Assurances and Certifications
Applicants are required to review and accept the Assurances and
Certifications. Please verify that the name, address, phone number, fax
number, and e-mail address of the authorizing official on these online
forms are correct.
[sbull] Assurances. Applicants must comply with the Assurances to
receive Federal funds under this program. It is the responsibility of
the recipient of the Federal funds to fully understand and comply with
these requirements. Failure to comply may result in the withholding of
funds, termination of the award, or other sanctions.
[sbull] Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension,
and Other Responsibility Matters; and the Drug-Free Workplace
Requirement. Applicants are required to review and check off the box on
the certification form included in the online application process. This
form commits the applicant to compliance with the 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 authorizing official must review the Assurances and
Certifications forms in their entirety. To accept the Assurances and
Certifications in GMS, click on the Assurances and Certifications link
and click the ``Accept'' button at the bottom of the screen.
Budget Detail Worksheet (Attachment 1) (15 Points)
Applicants must provide a proposed budget that is complete,
detailed, reasonable, allowable, and cost-effective in relation to the
activities to be undertaken. Budgets must allow for required travel,
including four trips for one individual to attend the quarterly ICAC
Task Force Board meetings. Budgets must also allow for the
participation of at least two agency representatives at the annual ICAC
Training Conference.
Applicants must submit budget worksheets and budget narratives in
one file. The worksheet provides the detailed computation for each
budget item (often in spreadsheet format). The narrative justifies or
explains each budget item and relates it to project activities.
[sbull] Budget Worksheet. The budget worksheet must list the cost
of each budget item and show how the cost was calculated. For example,
costs for personnel should show the annual salary rate and the
percentage of time devoted to the project for each employee to be paid
through grant funds. The budget worksheet should present a complete and
detailed itemization of all proposed costs.
[sbull] Budget Narrative. The budget narrative should closely
follow the content of the budget worksheet and provide justification
for all proposed costs. For example, the narrative should explain how
fringe benefits were calculated, how travel costs were estimated, why
particular items of equipment or supplies must be purchased, and how
overhead or indirect costs (if applicable) were calculated. The budget
narrative should justify the specific items listed in the budget
worksheet (particularly supplies, travel, and equipment) and
demonstrate that all costs are reasonable.
A sample Budget Detail Worksheet form that can be used as a guide
to help applicants prepare the budget worksheet and budget narrative is
available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov. (Use the main search engine to
search for ``Budget Detail Worksheet.'')
Program Narrative (Attachment 2) (85 Total Points)
Problem(s) To Be Addressed (10 Points)
Applicants must clearly identify the need for this project in their
communities and demonstrate an understanding of the program concept.
Applicants must include data that illustrate the size and scope of the
problem in their State or region. If statistics or other research
findings are used to support a statement or position, applicants must
provide the relevant source of information.
Goals and Objectives (10 Points)
Applicants must establish clearly-defined, measurable, and
attainable goals and objectives for this program.
Project Design (35 Points)
Applicants must explain in clear terms how the State or regional
task force will be developed and implemented. Applicants must define
the region, State, or, when applicable, the multistate area in which
the task force intends to concentrate its efforts. Applicants must
present a clear workplan that contains program elements directly linked
to achieving the project objectives. The workplan must indicate project
milestones, product due dates, and the nature of the products to be
delivered.
Management and Organizational Capability (30 Points)
The management structure and staffing described in the application
must be adequate and appropriate for the successful implementation of
the project. Applicants must identify individuals responsible for the
project and their time commitments. Applicants must provide a schedule
of major tasks and milestones. Applicants must describe how activities
that prevent Internet crimes against children will be continued after
Federal funding is no longer available. In addition, applicants must
provide signed letters of support from State and local prosecution
offices and the local district United States Attorney.
Other Program Attachments (Attachment 3)
At a minimum, resumes of key personnel and a project timeline
should be included.
Application Format
The narrative portion of this application (excluding forms,
assurances, and appendixes) must not exceed 35 pages and must be
submitted on 8\1/2\- by 11-inch paper and double spaced on one side in
a standard 12-point font. The double-spacing requirement applies to all
parts of the program narrative and project abstract, including any
lists, tables, bulleted items, or quotations. These standards are
necessary to maintain fair and uniform consideration among all
applicants. If the narrative and abstract do not conform to these
standards, OJJDP will deem the application ineligible for
consideration.
Project and Award Period
These cooperative agreements will be funded for up to an 18-month
budget and project period and will begin June 1, 2003, and end November
30, 2004. Funding beyond the initial project period will be contingent
upon the grantee's performance and the availability of funds.
Award Amount
The total amount available for this program is $1.5 million. OJJDP
intends to award five cooperative agreements of up to $300,000 each for
the 18-month project period.
Performance Measurement
To ensure compliance with the Government Performance and Results
Act, Pub. L. 103-62, this solicitation notifies applicants that they
are required to collect and report on data that measure the results of
the program
[[Page 33609]]
implemented by this grant. To ensure the accountability of this data
(for which OJP is responsible) the following performance measures are
provided:
[sbull] The number of investigations.
[sbull] The number of computer forensic examinations.
Under this solicitation, applicants will be required to supply
OJJDP with the above performance information. In addition, OJJDP will
measure the performance of the ICAC Task Force Program. Data collection
will be covered within the existing ICAC Monthly Performance Report
(MPR) forms. MPR is a required data-reporting document that was created
by OJJDP to collect ICAC data related to arrests, subpoenas, search
warrants, technical assistance (investigative and computer forensic),
and prevention and intervention activities performed by ICAC Regional
Task Forces and ICAC Investigative Satellites. Data gathered from MPRs
will track the number of arrests made and the outcomes of those arrests
(plea bargains, prosecutions, etc.), assist in the identification of
victims who need resources such as counseling and therapy, and track
tips and aid in target area identification.
Data collected from MPRs will provide crucial baseline data
necessary for a future evaluation of the ICAC Task Force Program after
it has been fully established throughout the country. Assistance in
obtaining this information will facilitate future program planning and
will allow OJP to provide Congress with measurable program results of
Federally funded programs.
Coordination of Federal Efforts
To encourage better coordination among Federal agencies in
addressing State and local needs, the U.S. Department of Justice
requests that applicants provide information on the following: (1)
Active Federal grant award(s) supporting this or related efforts,
including awards from the U.S. Department of Justice; (2) any pending
application(s) for Federal funds for this or related efforts; and (3)
plans for coordinating any funds described in items (1) or (2) with the
funding sought by this application. For each Federal award, applicants
must include the program or project title, the Federal grantor agency,
the amount of the award, and a brief description of its purpose.
``Related efforts'' is defined for these purposes as one of the
following:
[sbull] Efforts for the same purpose (i.e., the proposed award
would supplement, expand, complement, or continue activities funded
with other Federal grants).
[sbull] Another phase or component of the same program or project
(e.g., to implement a planning effort funded by other Federal funds or
to provide a substance abuse treatment or education component within a
criminal justice project).
[sbull] Services of some kind (e.g., technical assistance,
research, or evaluation) rendered to the program or project described
in the application.
Bibliography
Burgess, A., and Grant, C. 1988. Children Traumatized in Sex Rings.
Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Cage, R., and Pence, D. 1997. Criminal Investigation of Child
Sexual Abuse. Portable Guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Dressler, K. 1997. Multijurisdictional Task Forces: Ten Years of
Research and Evaluation: A Report to the Attorney General. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of
Justice Assistance.
Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K., and Wolak, J. 2000. Online
Victimization: A Report on the Nation's Youth. Alexandria, VA: National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Hammerschlag, M. 1996. Sexually Transmitted Diseases and Child
Sexual Abuse. Portable Guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Lanning, K. 1992. Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis for Law
Enforcement Officers Investigating Cases of Child Sexual Exploitation.
Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Lanning, K. 1992. Child Sex Rings: A Behavioral Analysis for
Criminal Justice Professionals Handling Cases of Child Sexual
Exploitation. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children.
Lanning, K., and Farley, R. 1997. Understanding and Investigating
Child Sexual Exploitation. Portable Guide. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Magid, L. 1994. Child Safety on the Information Highway. Pamphlet.
Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
Magid, L. 1998. Teen Safety on the Information Highway. Pamphlet.
Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. 1998. Know the
Rules. Pamphlet. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children.
Quarantiello, L. 1997. Cyber Crime: How to Protect Yourself from
Computer Criminals. Lake Geneva, WI: Tiare Publications.
Rosenblatt, K. 1995. High-Technology Crime: Investigating Cases
Involving Computers. San Jose, CA: KSK Publications.
Saywitz, K., and Faller, K. 1997. Interviewing Child Witnesses and
Victims of Sexual Abuse. Portable Guide. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Whitcomb, D. 1995. Child Sexual Exploitation: Improving
Investigations and Protecting Victims: A Blueprint for Action.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office for Victims of Crime.
Dated: May 30, 2003.
J. Robert Flores,
Administrator, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
[FR Doc. 03-14035 Filed 6-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P