Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; Supporting State Efforts to Link Administrative Data Systems for the Purpose of Studying the Effects of Welfare Reform on Other State and Federal Public Assistance Programs

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation;

Supporting State Efforts to Link Administrative Data Systems for the

Purpose of Studying the Effects of Welfare Reform on Other State and

Federal Public Assistance Programs

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation,

HHS.

ACTION: Request for grant applications from states to link their

administrative program data for the purposes of studying the effects of

the newly implemented Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

program on recipients and on other state and federal governmental

assistance programs.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and

Evaluation (ASPE) announces the availability of funds and invites

applications for data linking projects that will allow for improved

program management,

[[Page 33412]]

monitoring, and research and evaluation activities. The primary purpose

of this grant is to provide states with funding that will enable them

to link administrative program data from TANF and related State welfare

programs with administrative data from at least one other source. The

resulting data set can then be used to support research into the

effects of TANF on recipients and other government programs. While

efforts may be targeted in any area where there is potential

interaction between TANF and other government programs, ASPE has

identified six specific areas of policy interest. These areas are

outlined in section II, Topics of Priority Interest.

CLOSING DATE: The closing date for submitting applications under this

announcement is August 18, 1997.

FOR APPLICATION KITS OR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administrative

Officer, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation,

Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue, SW,

Room 405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Washington, DC 20201, Phone

(202) 401-6639.

Part I. Background and Purpose

A. Background

On August 22, 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Personal

Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of

1996. This law terminated the 61 year-old Aid to Families with

Dependent Children program and several related, smaller programs. In

its place, the PRWORA established a federal block grant, which gives

states great flexibility to develop their own programs and strategies

for providing assistance to the poor. Over time, state programs

targeted toward the poor are likely to diverge in the new block grant

environment. Over the coming years, it will become increasingly

important to understand the effects of these changes on recipients,

caseloads, and state and federal budgets, in order to assess the need

for and scope of future state and federal welfare policy. It will also

be important to understand the ways in which the varying TANF programs

affect other state and federal programs targeted toward the poor. For

example, do a state's changes to its welfare programs improve the

access and utilization of medical care among poor children? Does a

state's TANF program result in more children being abused, neglected,

and placed in the homes of relatives, thereby increasing the burden on

the child welfare system? Are new state programs more effective at

targeting victims of domestic violence, and offering services and

supports for victims who are so identified?

State administrative program data offer a potentially rich source

of information on the welfare population. They can therefore be used to

answer many of the questions surrounding the effects of the new welfare

law. Several states have been linking their administrative program data

from a variety of anti-poverty programs for many years, while other

states have begun more recently. These databases have provided valuable

insight into the characteristics of people served by assistance

programs, how program participation varies across different groups of

individuals, and how individuals access and utilize multiple services

over time. ASPE believes that these databases will prove valuable in

analyzing the collateral effects that TANF may have on recipients and

on other state and federal programs.

B. Purpose

Given that linked administrative program data have a tremendous

potential for assessing the impact of TANF on recipients and other

programs, the primary purpose of this grant is to provide states with

the necessary funding to link administrative program data from the TANF

program with administrative data from at least one other source in

order to address at least one policy relevant topic. The resulting data

set can then be used by the state to examine the interactions between

TANF and other governmental programs. For states that do not currently

have a database which contains linked program data, this grant will

provide the seed money and impetus for its creation. For states which

do have such a database, this funding can enable the state to add

administrative data from programs that are not currently represented in

the database. While the grant only requires TANF data to be linked with

data from one other program, preference will be given to projects which

would link data from multiple programs, as such projects would likely

provide a greater understanding of how TANF interacts with multiple

programs.

Applicants should also consider the time-frame of the information

to be included in the database. All projects must include case-level

information collected under the new law, which was signed in August of

1996 (states are required to convert to their TANF plans by July 1,

1997). However, preference will be given to those projects which

include historical data, so that comparisons can be drawn between prior

state AFDC programs--and their relationship to other assistance

programs--and new TANF programs.

Note that while a completed research product is not required under

this grant, eligible proposals must include a detailed research agenda

applicable to the resulting data. This must include the names of

qualified researchers who have expressed interest in analyzing the data

set. Letters of support from interested researchers and their

respective institutions are also strongly encouraged.

C. Eligible Applicants and Funding

We are specifically seeking proposals from state agencies which

operate either a TANF program or another state or federal assistance

program targeted toward the poor. Counties with a total population of

at least 500,000 which operate a county-based welfare system may also

apply. Applicants must also have and present proof of a state-wide (or

where appropriate, county-wide) database that links micro-level

administrative program data from at least two programs serving low-

income children and families. If an applicant does not currently have

such a database, then the applicant must present proof that such a

database will be operational and maintained subsequent to the

completion of this project.

Approximately $400,000 is available with funds appropriated for

fiscal year 1997. It is expected that approximately 4 awards at an

average of $100,000 for 12 months will be awarded. More projects may be

funded if additional funding becomes available in fiscal year 1998.

Part II. Topics of Priority Interest

These grants are designed to support state efforts to improve their

data infrastructure so that they can better assess the impacts of

welfare reform on other state and federal programs, as well as on

recipients. There are, therefore, no specific limitations as to the

topical areas that applicants may apply to explore with linked

administrative data. The following section contains six areas of

particular interest that ASPE has identified as relevant in the context

of the new welfare law. While each of the topical areas present a range

of issues, the possible research questions are in no way meant to be

exhaustive. If prospective applicants have additional questions which

they feel are relevant within the context of welfare reform and its

effect on other assistance programs--for example, the use of

administrative data to assess program use for children who have lost

SSI benefits--they are

[[Page 33413]]

encouraged to raise them in their proposal.

ASPE also understands that there is a great degree of variation in

the amount and scope of administrative program data that states

collect. It is therefore highly unlikely that every state would have

administrative data related to all of the issues and questions raised

in the following section. These issues are only meant as a guide to

assist prospective applicants in framing the scope of data to be linked

under this grant. Additionally, projects are not limited solely to

administrative data. Where appropriate and feasible, applicants may

choose to link their administrative data with either survey data or

other available data.

I. Supporting Services in the Transition From Welfare to Work

The new legislation establishes a five year time limit for the

receipt of federal TANF assistance, and a requirement that all able-

bodied caretaker recipients enroll in a work or work-training program

after two cumulative years of aid. This increased emphasis on work

raises questions as to whether states can provide sufficient services

to support the transition from welfare to work. Of specific concern are

assistance programs other than TANF, such as Medicaid and Food Stamps,

which recipients can use while transitioning between welfare and work.

The accessibility and affordability of quality child care are also

important determinants of the ability to leave welfare permanently.

Medicaid and Food Stamps

For TANF recipients who leave welfare, either for work or as the

result of a sanction or time limit, Medicaid and Food Stamps are likely

to assume even greater importance as transitional support mechanisms.

Both programs offer forms of assistance after eligibility for TANF has

expired. By linking individual level case data from both Medicaid and

Food Stamps, it may be possible to examine how TANF recipients combine

assistance from multiple programs, and how the combination of benefits

from these programs affects exits from welfare and/or sustained

financial independence.

Analysis of linked administrative data may also contribute to our

understanding of how welfare reform affects participation in both the

Medicaid and Food Stamps programs. If states make changes in Medicaid

eligibility, for example, how do these changes affect program

enrollment, participation patterns, and service utilization?

Additionally, many states are considering welfare diversion programs,

which would provide up-front cash assistance, in the hopes that a one-

time cash payment may eliminate the need for on-going TANF assistance.

Administrative data may also support analysis of the relationship

between diversion programs and participation in Medicaid and Food

Stamps.

Child Care

The provision of child care is also a critical support service of

any state TANF program. Just as with work programs, the new legislation

gives states considerably more latitude in how they provide and fund

child care. There are several groups of families that may be affected

by child care: current welfare recipients enrolled in work programs,

former recipients who are transitioning from welfare to work, and

families who are at-risk of entering welfare. There are several

important questions and concerns about the provision of child care for

all of these groups.

Basic types of care arrangements: To what extent is child

care available for people required to work and what are the most common

arrangements? What is the quality of each of these arrangements? How do

the patterns of usage vary among recipients enrolled in work programs

and former recipients no longer receiving welfare services? What are

the subsidy rates available for each group? To what extent are eligible

recipients taking advantage of services?

Welfare exits and child care: What is the effect of

welfare exits on child care? How do child care arrangements change once

people leave welfare, either via work or because they have been removed

from welfare due to sanctions or time limits? If child care funding is

limited for families transitioning off of welfare, where do the

children receive services, and what are the budgetary implications of

providing these services?

Child Support

While cooperation with child support was a requirement under AFDC,

changes under TANF both decrease and increase child support's

importance to low income families. In states that choose to eliminate

the $50 disregard, payment of child support becomes irrelevant to the

income of families receiving cash TANF payments. This change could

decrease the willingness of both resident and non-resident parents to

cooperate with the child support system, even though the requirements

for cooperation with the program for TANF and Food Stamp program

recipients have increased However, for families reaching the TANF time-

limits or trying to minimize the receipt of TANF cash payments, child

support can be an important supplement to low-wage or part-time

employment and in some cases may make it possible for families to

bridge short periods of unemployment without resorting to TANF cash

payments. It is important to understand how these changes in child

support policy affect the behavior of both resident and non-resident

parents in cooperating with child support, in viewing the fairness of

work activity which may require recipients to work off TANF benefits

already recouped through child support payments, in using child support

as an income supplement to low wages, and in the non-resident parent's

provision of financial and non-financial support for his family.

II. Relationships Between TANF and the Child Welfare System

It is possible that welfare reform will create additional financial

and social stress for many families, particularly those of long term

welfare recipients. Among the possible manifestations of such stress,

including the curtailing of welfare as an income source for some

household heads, are child neglect and abuse and the short-or long-term

dissolution of some particularly fragile families. Transfer of custody

of some children to grandparents or other relatives may also become a

more attractive option for parents whose benefits are sanctioned or who

become ineligible for assistance because of time limits or other

restrictions.

Are changes in child living arrangements correlated with the

imposition of time limits, sanctions, and work requirements? For

instance, are increasing numbers/proportions of children cared for by

relatives other than parents (either as assistance units headed by

relatives or as child-only assistance units)? Or are increasing

numbers/proportions of children neglected or abused, or entering foster

care, following the elimination of financial assistance to a family?

Linkages between welfare program administrative data and child welfare

data systems may assist in the investigation of such questions.

III. Impact of Teen Pregnancy and the Provision of Services to Teen

Parents

The PRWORA requires that any minor teen parent who is receiving

federally funded TANF services must live at home or in an adult

supervised setting unless there is a good cause exemption. It will be

important to determine how this affects both the population of teens

who are currently receiving welfare

[[Page 33414]]

services, and also those teens who will become pregnant and may require

TANF services subsequent to a state's implementation of TANF. For

example, what are the positive and negative consequences of this

provision? Are more teens living in supervised settings and completing

high school? Are teens losing welfare benefits or failing to qualify

for them because of non-compliance with this provision? If so, then how

many of these teens, and how many of their children, will instead

require services through other social service programs, such as the

child welfare system?

Additionally, since potential harm to the teen or her child would

qualify as a good cause exemption, there may be an increase in the

reporting of child abuse and neglect. Linking TANF data with

information from both child abuse and neglect reporting systems and

from child welfare systems will help clarify the effects of TANF on

teen parents receiving TANF services.

The new law also permits states to use TANF funds for family

planning and abstinence education. Through linking TANF data with

information from the providers of these services, a state could begin

to examine how these funds are being used and how adequately they are

being targeted toward TANF families. Additionally, if TANF data are

linked with Medicaid or Vital Statistics data, then a state could

assess how effective these services are with respect to decreasing teen

pregnancies among welfare recipients.

IV. Impact of TANF on Out-Of-Wedlock Births and Fertility Patterns

One of the four principal goals of the TANF program is to ``prevent

and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies.'' This emphasis

is coupled with the law's illegitimacy bonus, which awards funds to up

to five states that are most successful in reducing out-of-wedlock

births among women of all ages. States are designing and implementing

an array of programs aimed at reducing the number of births to

unmarried mothers. It will be important to assess the impacts of these

programs, both on the overall population, and more specifically on

those individuals receiving TANF assistance. Some specific questions

are as follows:

Do programs aimed at reducing out-of-wedlock birth rates

among the welfare population, such as family cap policies, actually

affect subsequent births on welfare mothers? If so, what is the

direction and magnitude of the change? Or do these policies encourage

welfare recipients to place children in different living situations

(relatives, for example) where they are eligible for assistance either

through the foster care system or as a separate AFDC/TANF unit?

Additionally, do these policies have any effect on a state's abortion

rate? If so, what are the direction and magnitude of the effect?

Does a stronger focus on work requirements and personal

responsibility have an impact on fertility? Specifically, what are the

fertility patterns of welfare recipients required to work and how do

they change over time? How do the changes in fertility patterns affect

caseloads and costs in other programs, such as Medicaid and the child

welfare system?

Given time limits and the increased emphasis on work, it

is likely that exits from welfare will increase significantly in the

coming years. It will be important to study how the fertility patterns

of people who lose benefits due to sanctions, time limits, and/or other

prohibitions differ from those remaining on assistance, and to

determine whether children born to those individuals removed from

assistance receive services in other government programs.

V. Domestic Violence

Many welfare recipients are victims of violence at the hands of

intimate partners. Evidence from Massachusetts suggests that about 20

percent of the women who received AFDC benefits in 1996 had been

subjected to violence within the past year. Many more had been

victimized in the past (Allard et al., 1997). In studies of welfare to

work programs, domestic violence has been identified as a significant

barrier to job training and employment.

The new welfare statute allows states to exempt battered women from

various welfare program requirements. In keeping with these provisions,

a number of states are planning to identify and provide services to

battered recipients and consider exemptions when necessary. These

states will need to include some type of data on this problem in their

information systems. Data may also be available on women who have been

involved with the judicial and law enforcement systems. For research

purposes, it may be possible to link data across these systems to study

differences in welfare participation between recipients who are

battered and those who are not so identified. It may also be possible

to identify supports provided to battered recipients.

Issues around domestic violence also play a role in determining

whether applicants and recipients of TANF benefits must cooperate with

the child support enforcement system or be given a good cause

exemption. Despite the high rates of domestic violence, good cause is

requested in less than .2 percent of TANF cases, and granted in about

.1 percent of cases. There have been no studies linking reported

incidents of domestic violence and the request for or granting of good

cause.

VI. Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Clients with substance abuse and mental health disorders present

particular challenges to welfare reform. Substance abuse is a

significant barrier to self sufficiency for some welfare recipients.

Estimates of the prevalence of substance abuse vary widely, but most

estimates conclude 10-20 percent of adults receiving AFDC have

substance abuse problems. The prevalence of substance abuse among

particular subgroups of the welfare population, such as long term

recipients, may be higher, although little data is currently available

on this topic (National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Directors, 1996). Among female substance abuse treatment clients with

children in their households, 64 percent were found to rely on welfare

income in the year prior to treatment admission (Gerstein et al.,

1997). One recent study found that approximately 38 percent of both

homeless and low income housed women had a current mental health

disorder, and nearly 70 percent had one during their lifetimes (Bassuk

et al., 1996). Many of the women with current disorders report

receiving some type of mental health services.

It is assumed that persons with substance abuse and mental health

disorders are likely to be over-represented in welfare receiving

populations and particularly among those reaching time limits, failing

to comply with program requirements, or subject to sanctions. To date,

however, no information has been available to test these assumptions.

It may be possible using administrative data from substance abuse and

mental health treatment systems and/or the Medicaid program, to

establish whether clients known to have substance abuse and mental

health disorders (whether or not such disorders are known to welfare

caseworkers) differ from other clients in their welfare utilization

patterns.

Part III. Application Preparation and Evaluation Criteria

This part contains information on the preparation of an application

for submission under this announcement, the forms necessary for

submission and the evaluation criteria under which the

[[Page 33415]]

applications will be reviewed. Potential applicants should read this

part carefully in conjunction with the information provided in Part II.

Application Forms

See section entitled ``Components of a Complete Application.'' All

of these documents must accompany the application package.

Length of Application

Applications should be as brief and concise as possible, but assure

communication of the applicant's proposal to the reviewers. In no case

shall the project narrative exceed 30 double spaced pages exclusive of

appropriate attachments. Only relevant attachments should be included,

for example, resumes of key personnel. Videotapes, brochures, and other

promotional materials will be discarded and not reviewed. Project

narratives should be formatted with 1 inch margins, no less than 10

point font, double spaced lines, with consecutively numbered pages.

Applications should be assembled as follows:

1. Abstract: Provide a one-page summary of the proposed project.

The abstract should clearly identify the following: the data sources to

be linked, the research agenda for the resulting data, and, where

applicable, the priority topic listed in Part II above.

2. Goals, Objectives, and Usefulness of Project: Include an

overview which describes the need for the proposed project; outlines

the reasons why these particular data sources are appropriate; proposes

a research agenda that utilizes the potential of the resulting data

set; and describes in general how the proposed project will advance

scientific knowledge and policy development. This section should also

summarize the applicant's overall strategy that pertains to the use of

administrative data in the evaluation of welfare reform strategies, and

how ASPE's funding fits into the overall scheme of the project.

3. Methodology and Design: Provide a description and justification

of how the proposed data-linking project will be completed, including

methodologies, approach to be taken, data sources to be used and

linked, and proposed research and analytic plans. This section should

clearly identify which data sources will be used, the time-period that

the data capture, the population covered by the data, and the method(s)

which will be used to link the data. Additionally, a discussion of how

the administrative data will be cleaned and checked for accuracy must

be included. The proposals should also provide proof that the grantee

has obtained the necessary authorization to access and link all data

sources proposed within the scope of the project. The preferred form of

proof is a signed interagency agreement with each of the relevant

agencies/departments. Though not preferable, letters of support from

the appropriate agencies are acceptable, provided that the letter

clearly states that the proposing agency has the authorization to

access and link all necessary data. This section should also include a

concise and specific discussion of how the case or individual level

data will be kept confidential. Applicants must assure that the

collected data will only be used for management and research purposes,

and that all information will be kept completely confidential, and

should present the methods that will be used to ensure confidentiality

of records and information once data are made available for research

purposes.

4. Experience of Personnel/Organizational Capacity: Briefly

describe the applicant's organizational capabilities and experience in

conducting relevant projects using linked administrative program data.

Identify the key staff who are expected to carry out the data

organization and linking, as well as those who plan to conduct research

with the resulting data. Provide a curriculum vitae for each person. Be

sure to include a brief discussion of how each key staff member will

contribute to the success of the project.

5. Ability to Sustain Data Linkages After Completion of Funding: A

successful proposal must present evidence that the data linkages

established in this project will become institutionalized into an on-

going database. The proposal should describe how the linking of data

will become institutionalized, which agency will have responsibility

for and jurisdiction over the resulting data, what mechanisms will be

instituted to determine who will have access to the data for program

management, monitoring, and research purposes, and the sources of

financial and staff support for maintaining the database. Proposals

should also relate the extent to which the data will be used for future

policy planning, research and evaluation.

6. Work plan: A Work plan should be included which describes the

start and end dates of the project, the responsibilities of each of the

key staff, and a time line which shows the sequence of tasks necessary

for the completion of the project. Identify the other time commitments

of key staff members, for example, their teaching or managerial

responsibilities as well as other projects in which they are involved.

The Work plan should include a discussion of any plans for

dissemination of the results, such as papers, articles, or conference

presentations, as well as any types of documentation for the data set

that is to be produced through this grant. Finally, the work plan must

include how the data linked under this grant will eventually be made

available for research and evaluation purposes. If one or more public

use tapes are anticipated, then this should be specified. If public use

tapes are not planned, then the work plan must specify how interested

and qualified researchers will be allowed access to the data.

7. Budget: Submit a request for Federal funds using Standard Form

424A and provide a proposed budget using the categories listed on this

form. A narrative explanation of the budget should be included which

explains in more detail what the funds will be used for. If other

sources of funds are being received to support aspects of this

research, the source, amount, and other relevant details must be

included. The proposal should also clearly specify whether state

support will be included, and if so, the type and amount of such

support.

All applicants must budget for two trips to the Washington, DC

area, for at least two people on each trip. As part of this grant, ASPE

would like to schedule two meetings for all funded projects. The first

meeting will be for planning purposes, where applicants will have the

opportunity to meet, discuss their projects, and receive feedback from

both the other grantees and from ASPE staff. This meeting will occur

not more than two months after the proposals are funded. The second

meeting will be approximately 6 to 8 months into the grant period, and

will provide grantees the ability to meet and discuss their progress to

date, and assess and receive assistance with any problems that have

arisen.

Review Process and Funding information

Applications will be initially screened for compliance with the

timeliness and completeness requirements. Five (5) copies of each

application are required. One of these copies must be in an unbound

format, suitable for copying. If judged in compliance, the application

then will be reviewed by government personnel, augmented by outside

experts where appropriate.

The panel will review the applications using the evaluation

criteria listed below to score each

[[Page 33416]]

application. These review results will be the primary element used by

the ASPE in making funding decisions.

HHS reserves the option to discuss applications with other Federal

agencies, Central or Regional Office staff, specialists, experts,

States and the general public. Comments from these sources, along with

those of the reviewers, may be considered in making an award decision.

As a result of this competition, between 3 and 4 grants are

expected to be made from funds appropriated for fiscal year 1997.

Additional awards may be made depending on the extensiveness of the

data involved and the available funding, including funds that may

become available in FY98. The Department reserves the right to make

fewer awards, if enough suitable proposals are not received. The

average grant is expected to be between $100,000 and $125,000.

Deadline for Submission of Applications

The closing date for submission of applications under this

announcement is August 18, 1997. An application will be considered as

meeting the deadline if it is either: (1) received at, or hand-

delivered to, the mailing address on or before August 18, 1997 or (2)

postmarked before midnight five days prior to August 18, 1997 and

received in time to be considered during the competitive review process

(within two weeks of the deadline date). Applications may not be faxed.

When mailing application packages, applicants are strongly advised

to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial carrier (such as

UPS, Federal Express, etc.), or from the U.S. Postal Service as proof

of mailing by the deadline date. If there is a question as to when an

application was mailed, applicants will be asked to provide proof of

mailing by the deadline date. When proof is not provided, an

application will not be considered for funding. Private metered

postmarks are not acceptable as proof of timely mailing.

Hand-delivered applications will be accepted Monday through Friday

prior to and on August 18, 1997 during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:30

p.m. in the lobby of the Hubert H. Humphrey building located at 200

Independence Avenue SW., in Washington, DC. When hand delivering an

application, call 202-690-8794 from the lobby for pickup. A staff

person will be available to receive applications. Applications which do

not meet the August 18, 1997 deadline will not be considered or

reviewed. HHS will send a letter to this effect to each late applicant.

HHS reserves the right to extend the deadline for all applications

if there is widespread disruption of the mail because of extreme

weather conditions or natural disasters or if HHS determines an

extension to be in the best interest of the Government. However, HHS

will not waive or extend the deadline for any applicant unless the

deadline is waived or extended for all applicants.

Selection Process and Evaluation Criteria

Selection of the successful applicants will be based on the

technical criteria laid out in this announcement. Reviewers will

determine the strengths and weaknesses of each application in terms of

the evaluation criteria listed below, provide comments and assign

numerical scores. The review panel will prepare a summary of all

applicant scores, strengths, weaknesses and recommendations.

The point value following each criterion heading indicates the

maximum numerical weight that each section will be given in the review

process. An unacceptable rating on any individual criterion may render

the application unacceptable. Consequently, applicants should take care

to ensure that all criteria are fully addressed in the applications.

Applications will be reviewed as follows:

Evaluation Criteria

1. Goals, Objectives, and Potential Usefulness of the Analyses (20

points). Scoring will be based on the need for the project, the

potential usefulness of the objectives, and how the anticipated results

of the proposed project will advance policy development and program

management. The research agenda will be scrutinized to determine

whether the issues are relevant in the context of TANF, and whether the

research questions can actually be addressed with administrative data.

Scoring will also be based on the extent to which this specific project

is representative of the applicant's overall plan for using

administrative data to study the implementation and effectiveness of

the TANF program, and how TANF interacts with other assistance

programs. Preference will be given to those projects which link TANF

data with administrative data from two or more other State or Federal

social service assistance programs.

2. Methodology and Design (30 points). Scoring will be based on

whether the data sources included are appropriate for carrying out the

proposed research agenda, including the time frame of the data linked

and the population covered by the data. Concerning the time-frame of

the data, preference will also be given to those projects which link

historical data (pre-TANF implementation), as well as data collected

subsequent to the date which the state TANF program became operational.

A critical scoring element will be the proposal's discussion of the

methods used to clean, standardize and link the case level data from

the different sources. Applicants should discuss thoroughly how they

intend to match case records from different data sources, and what

internal validity checks will ensure the accuracy of the matches. The

architecture for the resulting data set should also be discussed

thoroughly. Other design considerations include whether the agency

applying has already obtained authorization to obtain and use data from

the different state or local agencies whose data would be linked, and

how confidentiality of the records and information will be ensured. It

applicants are unable to ensure the security of information included in

the project, then it is highly unlikely that they will receive funding.

3. Qualifications of Personnel and Organizational Capability (20

points). The principle scoring criteria are the qualifications of the

project personnel involved as evidenced by their professional training

and experience. Proposals should clearly articulate the experience of

applicable staff in similar projects that deal with linking

administrative data and assembling large databases. The capacity of the

organization to provide the infrastructure and support necessary for

the project is also an important concern.

4. Work Plan and Budget (15 points). Is the plan reasonable? Are

the activities sufficiently detailed to ensure successful, timely

implementation? Do they demonstrate an adequate level of understanding

by the applicant of the practical problems of conducting such a

project? Is the proposed budget reasonable and sufficient to ensure

completion of the project?

5. Ability to Sustain Project After Funding (15 points). How will

the linking of data sources become an institutionalized function within

the agency once the grant funding expires? Where will the newly created

data set reside? What agency(ies) will have responsibility for and

jurisdiction over the resulting data? What are the sources of financial

and staff support for maintaining the database? How will the linked

data be used for future policy planning, research and evaluation?

[[Page 33417]]

Disposition of Applications

1. Approval, Disapproval, or Deferral

On the basis of the review of an application, the ASPE will either

(a) approve the application in whole, as revised, or in part for an

amount of funds and subject to such conditions as are deemed necessary

or desirable for the research project; or (b) disapprove the

application; or defer action on the application for such reasons as a

lack of funds or a need for further review.

2. Notification of Disposition

The ASPE will notify the applicants of the disposition of their

application. A signed notification of the award will be issued to

notify the applicant of the approved application.

3. The Assistant Secretary's Discretion

Nothing in this announcement should be construed as to obligate the

Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation to make any awards

whatsoever. Awards and the distribution of awards among the priority

areas are contingent on the needs of the Department at any point in

time and the quality of the applications which are received.

Components of a Complete Application

A complete application consists of the following items in this

order:

1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424, Revised

4-88);

2. Budget Information--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form

424A, Revised 4-88);

3. Assurances--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 424B,

Revised 4-88);

4. A Table of Contents;

5. Budget Justification for Section B--Budget Categories;

6. Proof of nonprofit status, if appropriate;

7. A copy of the applicant's approved indirect cost rate agreement

if necessary;

8. Project Narrative Statement, organized in five sections

addressing the following topics:

(a) Abstract,

(b) Goals, Objectives and Usefulness of the Project,

(c) Methodology and design,

(d) Background of the Personnel and Organizational Capabilities and

(e) Work plan (timetable);

9. Any appendices/attachments;

10. Certification Regarding Drug-Free Work place;

11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other

Responsibility Matters;

12. Certification and, if necessary, Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;

Reports

The grantee must submit quarterly progress reports and a final

report. The specific format and content for these reports will be

provided by the project officer.

State Single Point of Contact (E.O. No. 12372)

The Department of Health and Human Services has determined that

this program is not subject to Executive Order No. 12372,

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, because it is a program

that is national in scope and does not directly affect State and local

governments. Applicants are not required to seek intergovernmental

review of their applications within the constraints of E.O. No. 12372.

Dated: June 13, 1997.

David F. Garrison,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.

[FR Doc. 97-16083 Filed 6-18-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4151-04-P