NIJ FY23 Research and Evaluation on Sentencing and Resentencing | O NIJ 2023 171637

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the NIJ FY23 Research and Evaluation on Sentencing and Resentencing opportunity?

It is a discretionary grant program from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs (OJP), administered by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The program supports science and technology and other research and development projects that produce rigorous evidence about how sentencing, resentencing, and prison release frameworks affect people, communities, and public safety.

What types of projects does NIJ want to fund under this solicitation?

NIJ is looking for strong research and evaluation proposals designed to credibly answer real-world questions about the consequences of sentencing and resentencing policies and prison release decision-making. The expectation is that findings will be useful for policy and practice, not just academic insight.

What is the broader policy context for this grant?

The solicitation is framed within OJP priorities that include advancing civil rights and racial equity, increasing access to justice, supporting crime victims and others impacted by the justice system, strengthening community safety, protecting the public from evolving threats, and building trust between law enforcement and communities.

Does NIJ prefer certain research team structures or disciplines?

NIJ encourages multidisciplinary teams. Proposals may be strengthened by combining complementary expertise (for example, quantitative policy analysis with qualitative fieldwork) and drawing from relevant fields such as legal scholarship, implementation science, economics, criminology, sociology, public health, or other appropriate areas.

How important is lived-experience engagement in this opportunity?

It is a major emphasis. NIJ states it will give special consideration to methods that engage, in substantive ways, people and groups with lived experience related to the topic being studied, including justice practitioners, community members, crime victims, service providers, and individuals with justice system involvement.

What does "meaningful engagement" look like according to the solicitation?

The solicitation points toward engagement models where lived experience informs the research questions, measures, interpretation of results, and dissemination. Examples mentioned include advisory boards, community-based participatory approaches, structured listening sessions, and co-design of research instruments.

Are applicants expected to address diversity, discrimination, and bias in their research design?

Yes, where relevant and measurable. NIJ wants applicants to explicitly consider diversity, discrimination, and bias, including dimensions such as age, gender and gender identity, race, ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation. Proposals are strengthened when they explain how disparities will be measured and how subgroup analyses will be handled responsibly.

What kinds of disparity-related issues should proposals be prepared to examine?

The solicitation signals interest in analyses that can address issues like differential exposure to policies, differential decision-making at key points (such as charging, sentencing, and release), and differential post-release outcomes, when applicable to the proposed work.

If our project includes agency partners, what documentation is required?

Applications should include a letter of support from an appropriate decision-making authority at each partnering agency. The solicitation also expects clear documentation and planning for the partnership.

What must be included in partner letters of support regarding data archiving?

Each partner letter must acknowledge that de-identified data derived from, provided to, or obtained through an NIJ-funded award will be archived by the grant recipient with the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD) at the end of the project.

What is the NACJD data archiving requirement?

De-identified data connected to the NIJ-funded award (derived from, provided to, or obtained through the project) must be archived with NACJD at the end of the project by the grant recipient. This is presented as a key compliance and project management expectation.

When do formal agreements with partnering agencies need to be in place?

If selected for funding, the grantee is expected to have a formal agreement in place with partnering agencies by January 1, 2024. The agreement must include provisions that satisfy the data archiving requirement.

Does NIJ provide guidance that applicants should review related to data archiving?

Yes. NIJ encourages applicants and partners to review NIJ data archiving guidance ahead of time, especially because the requirement is not optional and must be addressed through planning and formal agreements.

What does NIJ expect for dissemination of research findings?

NIJ is seeking robust, creative, multi-pronged dissemination plans with an implementation-oriented mindset. The solicitation emphasizes strategic partnerships with organizations and associations positioned to translate findings into policy or practice changes.

Is publication in academic journals enough to meet dissemination expectations?

The solicitation suggests applicants should go beyond academic publishing. It points toward practitioner-facing and community-relevant outputs such as tools, briefings, trainings, policy memos, convenings, and other deliverables tailored to decision-makers and affected communities.

Is there a recommended budget commitment for dissemination?

Yes. NIJ will give special consideration to proposals that dedicate at least 15 percent of the requested project funding to dissemination strategies. Applicants are expected to show that commitment explicitly in both the Budget Worksheet and the Budget Narrative.

How should multi-entity collaborations be structured for this federal grant?

Only one entity may apply as the applicant organization, even if multiple agencies or organizations will use federal award funds to carry out the project.

If multiple organizations will perform substantive work using grant funds, how should they be included?

Any additional participating entities that will carry out substantive work using grant funds must be included as subrecipients.

Can the applicant organization mainly pass funds through to other entities?

No. NIJ notes the applicant is expected to conduct the majority of the work proposed, which is intended to prevent the applicant from serving primarily as a pass-through while most activities occur elsewhere.

Who is eligible to apply for this grant?

Eligibility is broad and includes state, county, and city or township governments; special district governments; independent school districts; public and state-controlled and private institutions of higher education; federally recognized tribal governments and other tribal organizations; public housing authorities/Indian housing authorities; nonprofit organizations (both with and without 501(c)(3) status, excluding higher education institutions in that nonprofit category); for-profit organizations other than small businesses; and small businesses.

What is the CFDA number for this program?

The program is listed under CFDA 16.560.

What agency administers this opportunity?

The opportunity is administered by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) within the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), U.S. Department of Justice.

What is the opportunity number?

The opportunity number is O-NIJ-2023-171637.

What was the original closing date for this solicitation?

The original closing date was May 16, 2023.

What is the maximum award amount (award ceiling)?

The award ceiling is $2,000,000.

Does the solicitation indicate what NIJ values most in a competitive proposal?

Based on the information provided, NIJ emphasizes (1) rigorous research and evaluation that answers real-world questions, (2) usefulness of findings for policy and practice, (3) multidisciplinary project teams where appropriate, (4) meaningful lived-experience engagement, (5) explicit attention to diversity, discrimination, and bias when relevant and measurable, (6) clear partnership documentation and data archiving compliance planning, and (7) strong dissemination designed for implementation, including a visible budget commitment.