Discretionary Cooperative Agreements to Support the Demonstration and Evaluation of Safe Communities Programs

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Discretionary Cooperative Agreements to Support the Demonstration

and Evaluation of Safe Communities Programs

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Announcement of discretionary cooperative agreements to support

the demonstration and evaluation of Safe Communities Programs

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

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

announces the second year of a discretionary cooperative agreement

program to demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe

Communities concept for traffic safety initiatives. The Safe

Communities program offers communities a new way to control traffic

injuries. This approach recognizes that traffic-related deaths and

injuries are primarily a local community problem that is best solved at

the local level. The Safe Communities program adopts a comprehensive

injury control approach to address traffic injury problems. Recognizing

that traffic fatalities are only a small part of the total traffic

injury problem, Safe Communities focuses on non-fatal injuries as well

as fatal injuries to define the traffic safety problem, and asks who is

paying the costs of the injuries. Four characteristics define the Safe

Communities approach: Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and

linkage where possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in

setting priorities, and movement towards an integrated and

comprehensive injury control system.

In 1996 under Phase I of this demonstration and evaluation program,

cooperative agreements were awarded to the Greater Dallas Injury

Prevention Program and the East Carolina University/Eastern Carolina

Injury Prevention Program. This notice solicits applications from

public and private, non-profit, and non-for-profit organizations,

governments and their agencies, or a consortium of these organizations

that are interested in developing, implementing and evaluating the Safe

Communities approach in their community. The funds from this program

may only be used to support traffic safety activities within the larger

context of community injury control efforts. Private contractors,

working on behalf of community groups are not eligible to apply.

Preference will be given to those applications which help NHTSA meet

its needs to obtain geographic diversity, urban/rural mix, diversity in

lead organization(s); potential for replication in other communities,

and/or other factors deemed relevant by NHTSA.

NHTSA anticipates awarding two (2) demonstration and evaluation

projects for a period of three years each as a result of this

announcement.

[[Page 6604]]

DATES: Applications must be received at the office designated below by

3:00 PM on or before May 1, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Applications must be submitted to the National Highway

Traffic Administration, Office of Contracts and Procurement (NAD-30),

ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301, Washington, D.C.

20590. All applications submitted must include a reference to NHTSA

Cooperative Agreement Program No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Interested

applicants are advised that no separate application package exists

beyond the contents of this announcement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General administrative questions along

with requests for copies of the OMB Standard Form 424-Application for

Federal Assistance and Certified Assurances may be directed to Amy

Poling, Office of Contracts and Procurement. All questions and requests

may be directed by e-mail at [email protected] or, if necessary, at

202-366-9552. Programmatic questions relating to this cooperative

agreement program should be directed to Barbara Sauers, Traffic Safety

Programs, NHTSA, NTS-22 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590,

by e-mail at [email protected] or, if necessary, at 202-366-0144.

NHTSA intends to post this Federal Register Announcement and OMB

Standard Form 424 on the NHTSA home page at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov

under ``What's Hot''.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The past several decades witnessed dramatic advances in medical

care and shifts in health behaviors. Despite the advances, injuries

remain a major health care problem, and the leading cause of death for

persons from age 1 to 44. Fatalities, however, are only a small part of

the total injury picture. For each injury-related death, there are 19

injury hospitalizations and over 300 injuries that require medical

attention. These injuries account for almost 10 percent of all

physician office visits and 38 percent of all emergency department

visits. For an individual, these injuries can vastly diminish quality

of life. For society, injuries pose a significant drain on the health

care system, incurring huge treatment, acute care and rehabilitation

costs.

Motor vehicle injuries, in particular, are the leading cause of all

injury deaths and the leading cause of death for each age from 5

through 27. Motor vehicle-related injuries are the principal cause of

on-the-job fatalities, and the third largest cause of all deaths in the

U.S. Only heart disease and cancer kill more people. However, far more

people are injured and survive motor vehicle crashes than die in these

crashes. In 1995, for example, while over 41,000 persons were killed in

motor-vehicle related incidents and almost 3.4 million were injured.

These injured persons often required medical care and many required

long-term care. The costs of these injuries are enormous, over $150.5

billion each year in economic costs and $17 billion in medical costs.

The vast majority of these injuries and deaths are not acts of

fate, but are predictable and preventable occurrences. Injury patterns,

including traffic-related injury patterns, vary by age group, gender,

and cultural group. There are also seasonal and geographic patterns to

injury. Once the populations, types and locations of crashes and causes

of injuries that are associated in the community with increased

severity and high costs are identified, interventions can be designed

to address these factors specifically.

Safe Communities: A New Generation of Community Programs

American traffic safety advocates have traditionally worked in

partnerships with many organizations and groups to achieve a

successful, long and established history in preventing and reducing

traffic-related injuries and fatalities. For over 15 years, community-

based traffic safety programs have been and remain an effective means

for identifying local crash problems and providing local solutions.

Building on past success, the Safe Communities program offers

communities a new way to control traffic injuries. This approach

recognizes that traffic-related deaths and injuries are primarily a

local community problem. Effective preventive efforts require a

coordinated approach involving Federal, State and local organizations.

The Safe Communities approach adopts a comprehensive injury control

model to address traffic injury problems within the context of all

injuries. Recognizing that traffic fatalities are only a small part of

the total traffic injury problem, Safe Communities focus on fatal and

non-fatal injuries (as opposed to only fatalities) to define the

traffic safety problem, and ask who is paying the costs of the

injuries. Safe Communities recognize the importance of citizens in

identifying community problems and solutions, as well as the importance

of partnerships in implementing solutions to community problems.

The Safe Communities approach represents an evolutionary (rather

than revolutionary) way in which community programs are established and

managed. Four characteristics define the Safe Communities approach:

Data analysis of crash and injury data bases (and linkage where

possible), expanded partnerships, citizen involvement in setting

priorities, and movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury

control system. Each of these characteristics is described below.

Analysis of Multiple Data Bases is critical to Safe Communities

because addressing traffic-related injuries suggests that not only

fatalities are reduced, but injuries and health care costs as well.

This shift from an emphasis on fatalities to one emphasizing injuries

and cost reduction means that different data bases need to be

identified. Police crash reports tell only part of the story. Analysis

of data from health departments, hospitals, EMS providers, business,

rehabilitation programs, and insurance companies helps project

managers', community leaders' and others' understanding of the

magnitude and consequences of traffic injuries and monitoring progress

in reducing the problem. Even more effective is data linkage which can

provide opportunities, for example, to identify when and where young

people in the community drink and drive, their risk for impaired

driving which result in crashes, the types of injuries which occur, and

how much these injuries cost the community compared to other types of

injuries caused by young people who drink. Thus, countermeasures can be

designated to address these risk factors (e.g., traffic safety and

violence prevention efforts can join forces to reduce youth access to

alcohol).

Expanded partnerships are important to solve local injury problems

effectively through comprehensive and collaborative strategies. Traffic

safety advocates have long recognized that traffic problems are too

complex and resources too limited for them to solve in isolation. As a

result, over the years, the traffic safety community has worked with

law enforcement, emergency medical services, local government, schools,

courts, business, health departments, and community and advocacy

organizations to reduce traffic injuries. Safe Communities continue to

work with these existing partners, but also seek to expand the

partnership base to involve actively the medical, acute care and

rehabilitation communities. These groups, which have traditionally been

focused on treating disease, need to be engaged as integral partners in

preventing injuries.

[[Page 6605]]

Safe Communities enlist business and employers as full partners in

community injury prevention activities. Employers need to understand

how traffic-related injuries contribute to their overall costs, and how

participation in community-wide injury prevention efforts can help them

reduce their own costs due to motor vehicle injuries. Through

partnerships and collaboration, Safe Communities spread program

ownership and delivery systems throughout the community. Finally, Safe

Communities provide an opportunity for traditional traffic safety

partners--such as law enforcement and schools--to understand better the

linkages among risk-taking behaviors. For example, individuals who

commit traffic offenses may also be involved with other kinds of

problem or illegal behaviors.

Citizen involvement and input are essential to establish community

priorities for identified problems. Town meetings and other techniques

are routinely used to solicit wide-spread citizen input and feedback

about community injury problems. Citizens are actively involved

identifying, designing and implementing solutions to their injury

problems. Citizens actively participate in problem identification,

assume responsibility and ownership for shaping solutions, and share in

both the successes and challenges of their program.

Movement towards an integrated and comprehensive injury control

system incorporates the elements of prevention, acute care, and

rehabilitation as active and essential participants insolving community

injury problems. This is the crux of the Safe Communities approach, and

often one or more of these groups have not traditionally been involved

in addressing community traffic injury problems or their involvement

has focused only on prevention and not their role in the overall

system. Involvement of the three component groups will not happen

overnight or in every community, but it is something to strive for over

time.

The ``evolutionary shift'' from current programs to Safe

Communities is summarized in Table 1 (below). Community partners

participate as equals in developing solutions, sharing success,

assuming programming risks, planning for self-sufficiency, and building

a community infrastructure and process for continual improvement of

community life through reduction of traffic-related injuries,

fatalities, and costs.

Table 1.--New Thinking About Community Programs

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

Current program emphasis Evolving program emphasis

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

Reducing fatalities....................... Reducing fatal and non-fatal

injuries & health care and

social costs.

Traffic safety as the objective........... Traffic safety integrated

into broader injury control

efforts.

Prevention-based solutions................ Systems-based solutions

(integration of prevention,

acute care,

rehabilitation).

Agency-based delivery system.............. Community/citizen ownership.

Traditional traffic safety................ Adds new or expanded health,

injury, partners business,

and government partners.

Administration evaluation................. Impact evaluation/cost

benefit analysis.

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

Objectives

Under this cooperative agreement the effectiveness of the Safe

Communities approach for traffic safety initiatives shall be

demonstrated and evaluated to determine the impact on reducing traffic

related injuries and associated costs to the community. Specific

objectives for this cooperative agreement program are as follows:

1. Work with existing community traffic safety and/or injury

control coalitions and apply the defining characteristics to establish

a Safe Communities approach for reducing traffic injuries.

2. Use community and/or state data, as appropriate, to define the

community's traffic injury problem within the context of the

community's overall injury problem. Where possible, population based

data are preferred. Data sources in addition to police crash reports

are required for this purpose. The costs of traffic injuries to the

community (which may include emergency medical services, acute care,

hospital, medical, rehabilitation, insurance, lost wages, and workmen's

compensation) are to be documented.

3. Actively engage community residents in defining both the

community's traffic injury problem as well as solutions to the problem.

The grantee shall develop strategies for ensuring wide-spread citizen

involvement throughout the project.

4. In addition to traditional traffic safety partners (e.g., law

enforcement) identify and actively engage health care (both provider

and payer) and business partners in the Safe Communities approach. The

grantee is responsible for ensuring active and committed participation

from these two sectors.

5. Implement a program to reduce traffic-related injuries in the

community. The programs could address any area of traffic safety

including alcohol-impaired driving, use of occupant restraints,

speeding, emergency medical services, or pedestrian or bicycle safety.

The intervention program should be based on data and citizen input and

should actively engage all sectors of the community, including health

care, business, local government, law enforcement, schools, and media.

The program should also include elements of an integrated injury

control system (prevention, acute care and rehabilitation) and/or plans

for how the program will move towards this type of approach.

6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the Safe Communities approach in

reducing traffic-related injuries and associated costs. In addition,

evaluate the process of establishing a Safe Communities approach (what

works, what does not work, how to engage partners, how to overcome

barriers, challenges, how to run challenges into opportunities, etc.)

Availability of Funds

A total of $800K is available in FY97 to fund this program. Two (2)

demonstration and evaluation projects will receive awards of $400K each

to be used over a period of three years. In each project, $150K must be

dedicated to evaluation activities. Given the amount of funds available

for this effort, applicants are strongly encouraged to seek other

funding opportunities to supplement the federal funds and include cost-

sharing plans and commitments.

Period of Performance

The period of performance for this cooperative agreement will be

three years from the effective date of award.

NHTSA Involvement

NHTSA will be involved in all activities undertaken as part of the

cooperative agreement program and will:

1. Provide a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR)

to participate in the planning and management of this Cooperative

Agreement and to coordinate activities between the Grantee and NHTSA.

2. Provide information and technical assistance from government

sources within available resources and as determined appropriate by the

COTR.

[[Page 6606]]

3. Serve as a liaison between NHTSA Headquarters, Regional Offices

and others (Federal, state and local) interested in the safe

communities approach and the activities of the grantee.

4. Stimulate the transfer of information among grant recipients and

others engaged in safe communities activities.

Eligibility and Other Applicant Requirements

Applications may be submitted by public and private, non-profit and

not-for-profit organizations, and governments and their agencies or a

consortium of the above. Thus, universities, colleges, research

institutions, hospitals, other public and private (non- or not-for-

profit) organizations, and State and local governments are eligible to

apply. Private contractors working on behalf of community groups are

not eligible to apply. Interested applicants are advised that no fee or

profit will be allowed under this cooperative agreement program. These

demonstration projects will require extensive collaboration among each

of these various organizations in order to achieve the program

objectives. It is envisioned during the pre-application process, these

various organizations will designate one organization to prepare and

submit the formal application.

Applicant Procedures

Each applicant must submit one original and five copies of the

application package to: NHTSA, Office of Contracts and Procurement

(NAD-30), ATTN: Amy Poling, 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 5301,

Washington, DC 20590. Applications must be typed on one side of the

page only, and must include a reference to NHTSA Cooperative Agreement

No. DTNH22-97-H-05108. Unnecessarily elaborate applications beyond what

is sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this

invitation are not desired. Only complete packages received by 3:00 PM

on or before May 1, 1997 will be considered.

Application Content

Applicants for this program must include the following information:

1. The application package must be submitted with OMB Standard Form

424 (Rev. 4-88, including 424A and 424B), application for Federal

Assistance, with the required information filled in and certified

assurances signed. While the form 424A deals with budget information,

and Section B identified Budget Categories, the available space does

not permit a level of detail which is sufficient to provide for a

meaningful evaluation of the proposed total costs. A supplemental sheet

shall be provided which presents a detailed breakdown of the proposed

costs, as well as any costs which the applicant indicates will be

contributed locally in support of the demonstration project.

2. The application shall include a program narrative statement

which addresses the following information in separately labeled

sections:

a. A table of contents including page number references.

b. A description of the community in which the applicant proposes

to work. For the purposes of this program, a ``community'' includes a

city, town or county, small metropolitan area, or even a large

neighborhood (i.e., it does not have to correspond with a political

jurisdiction). It should be large enough so that the program can have a

demonstrable effect on injuries, while not so large as to lose a sense

of community. The description of the community should include, at a

minimum, community demographics, the community's traffic injury problem

using the most recent three years of local and/or state data available

(including data from multiple sources such as police, hospital, EMS,

vital records, etc.), a list of data sources available, existing

traffic safety or injury control coalitions, community resources and

political structure and commitment.

c. A preliminary description of the community's traffic injury

problem, including injury, fatality and cost data. If chosen for award,

the applicant will be required to conduct a more thorough problem

analysis that includes input from citizens residing in the community.

Therefore, a plan on how this more thorough problem analysis will be

conducted and how citizen input will be obtained is required in the

proposal.

d. A description of the goal of the program and how the grantee

plans to establish a Safe Communities program in the proposed site.

What will the grantee do to ``move'' the site towards the Safe

Communities concept? What will be different from existing community

programs? How will the grantee obtain citizen involvement in setting

program priorities? What health and business partners will be engaged?

How will they be engaged? What will they do?

e. An implementation plan that describes the types of interventions

or activities proposed to achieve the objectives of the Safe

Communities program. Given the community motor vehicle injury problem

analysis, the implementation plan needs to include a description of the

types of interventions that would be considered and how citizens would

be engaged in identifying the interventions. The implementation plan

must also include a discussion of how the applicant will develop the

final implementation plan; how the plan will relate to the identified

problems; how citizens, business, health/medical organizations, and

others will be involved in the delivery of the program; what action the

community will undertake to reach its objectives; how the intervention

will be delivered; how delivery will be monitored; and the expected

results from the intervention. The implementation plan should address

elements from prevention, acute care and rehabilitation (integrated

comprehensive injury control system) and/or how the program will move

towards inclusion of these elements. The implementation plan shall also

address prospects for program continuation beyond the period of Federal

assistance.

f. A proposed evaluation plan (both quantitative and qualitative)

based on the initial data analysis that describes the kinds of

questions to be addressed by the evaluation design, what the outcome

measures are expected to be, how they will be measured, the methodology

for collecting the data, how often data will be collected, and how the

data will be analyzed. The plan should indicate how action undertaken

by the community will be linked with outcome measures. It is important

that the area encompassed by the Safe Communities program coincide with

the population covered by the data to be used in the evaluation, or

that the data systems allow the disaggregation of the relevant

population.

g. A description of the full working partnership that has been or

will be established to conduct the Safe Communities program. The

application shall describe all the partners (from prevention, acute

care and rehabilitation) that will participate in the program (e.g.

local government, law enforcement, health care, injury prevention,

insurance, business, education, media, citizens) and what the role for

each partner will be. A complete set of letters of commitment written

by major partners, organizations, groups, and individuals proposed for

involvement in this project shall detail what each partner is willing

to do over the course of the project period (e.g. provide data, staff,

resources, etc.) Form letters that do not specifically address these

issues are not acceptable. Letters from owners of the data (injury,

cost,

[[Page 6607]]

other) required for successful completion of this project must also be

submitted. These letters must indicate that the data required for the

project are accessible to the project team.

h. A description of how the project will be managed, both at the

applicant level and at the community level. The application shall

identify the proposed project manager and any support personnel

considered critical to the successful accomplishment of this project,

including a brief description of their qualifications and respective

organizational responsibilities. The roles and responsibilities of the

grantee, the community and any others included in the application

package shall be specified. The proposed level of effort in performing

the various activities shall also be identified. A staffing plan and

resume for all key project personnel shall be included in the

application.

i. A separately-labeled section with information demonstrating that

the applicant meets all of the special competencies:

(1) Knowledge and familiarity with data sources such as police

crash and crime reports, EMS files, emergency department data, hospital

discharge data, and injury cost data (i.e. cost of injuries to the

community); and injury surveillance systems (including analyzing and

linking such data files). Availability of and accessibility to relevant

data in their community from police crash reports and at least one or

two injury data sources.

(2) Capable of:

i. Designing comprehensive program evaluations;

ii. Collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative

iii. Synthesizing, summarizing and reporting evaluation results

which are usable and decision-oriented.

(3) Experience in working in partnership with others, especially

business, health care systems (providers and payers) and government

organizations, media and with local citizens in implementing solutions

to community problems.

(4) Experience in implementing injury control programs (prevention,

acute care, rehabilitation) at the community level.

j. A dissemination plan that describes how the results of this

demonstration and evaluation project will be shared with interested

parties. The dissemination plan should include preparation of a final

report and process manual (see reporting requirements), 1-2 briefings

per year at the NHTSA headquarters, presentation at one or more

national meetings per year (e.g. APHA, Lifesavers, etc.), and if

appropriate, preparation and submission of at least one paper for

publication in a professional journal.

Application Review Process and Evaluation Factors

Each application package will initially be reviewed to confirm that

the applicant is an eligible recipient and that the application

contains all of the items specified in the Application Contents section

of this announcement. Each complete application from an eligible

recipient will then be evaluated by an evaluation committee. The

applications will be evaluated using the following criteria:

1. Understanding of the Community (10%). The extent to which the

applicant has demonstrated an understanding of the community, including

the community's demographics, traffic safety problem, resources

(including data), and political structure. The extent to which the

applicant is knowledgeable about community data sources, is able to use

the data sources to define the community traffic injury problem, and

has demonstrated the community's need for a safe communities approach

to controlling traffic injuries and the community's willingness to

commit and participate in the program. The extent to which the

applicant has access to the community and potential target populations

in the community.

2. Problem Identification (20%). The extent of the applicant's

capability to identify through the Safe Communities process the

significance of the traffic injury problem in relation to other types

of injuries which occur in the community; and to identify among those

residents involved in motor vehicle crashes the populations, types and

locations of crashes, human factors issues (e.g., occupant restraint

usage rates), types of vehicles, and the types of injuries which are

most associated with increased injury severity and high care costs for

this community. The problem identification will also be evaluated with

respect to the potential for the Safe Communities approach to prevent

or reduce the traffic injury problem.

3. Goals, Objectives and Implementation Plan (15%). The extent to

which the applicant's goals are clearly articulated; the objectives are

time-phased, specific, measurable, and achievable; and the goals and

objectives relate to identified problems. The extent to which the

implementation plan will achieve an outcome-oriented result that will

reduce traffic-related injuries and costs to the community. The

implementation plan should address what the applicant proposes to

implement in the community and how this will be accomplished. The

implementation plan will be evaluated with respect to its feasibility,

realism, and ability to achieve the desired outcomes as well as

prospective plans for program continuation beyond the period of Federal

assistance.

4. Collaboration (15%). The extent to which the applicant has

demonstrated experience in a full working partnership for data

acquisition and analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation of a

community program; and the extent to which such a partnership has been

established among the applicant and critical components in the

community representing prevention, acute care and rehabilitation. Has

the applicant specified who will be involved in the program and what

the role of each partner will be? The extent to which the applicant has

demonstrated access to partners deemed critical to this effort, such as

health care, business, and local government. Has the applicant shown

that potential partners are committed to working with the program? In

what way will potential partners participate? The extent to which the

applicant describes how citizens will be actively engaged in the safe

communities program.

5. Evaluation Plan (15%). How well the applicant describes the

proposed evaluation design and the methods for measuring the processes

and outcomes of the proposed interventions (countermeasures). How well

will the evaluation plan be able to measure the effectiveness of the

safe communities approach? Does the applicant provide sufficient

evidence that the proposed community partnership is committed to

evaluation? Are there sufficient data sources and is there sufficient

capacity to collaborate with appropriate community program partners to

ensure access to data; identify/create and test appropriate

instruments; and collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data

for measuring the effectiveness of the safe communities approach? How

well does the applicant ensure the availability of staff and facilities

to carry out the submitted evaluation plan?

6. Special Competencies (15%). The extent to which the applicant

has demonstrated knowledge and experience accessing and using relevant

data sources, designing and implementing comprehensive program

evaluations (using both qualitative and quantitative data),

implementing injury control programs, and working in partnership with

others on community programs.

7. Project Management and Staffing (10%). The extent to which the

[[Page 6608]]

proposed staff, including management and program staff and community

partners, are clearly described, appropriately assigned, and have

adequate skills and experiences. The extent to which the applicant has

the capacity and facilities to design, implement, and evaluate a

complex and comprehensive community program. The extent to which the

applicant provides details regarding the level of effort and allocation

of time for each staff position. Did the applicant submit an

organizational chart and resume for each proposed staff member? Does

the applicant provide a reasonable plan for accomplishing the

objectives of the project within the time frame set out in this

announcement?

Special Award Selection Factors

Applicants are strongly encouraged to seek funds for the purpose of

cost-sharing from other federal, State, local and private sources to

augment those available under this announcement. Applications which

include a commitment of such funds will be given additional

consideration.

For those applications that are evaluated as eligible for award,

consideration for final award will be made on the basis of geographic

diversity, urban/rural mix, organizational diversity and potential for

program replication.

Terms and Conditions of Award

1. Prior to award, each grantee must comply with the certification

requirements of 49 CFR part 20, Department of Transportation New

Restrictions on Lobbying, and 49 CFR part 29, Department of

Transportation government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-

procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug Free Workplace

(Grants).

2. Reporting Requirements and Deliverables:

a. Quarterly Progress Reports should include a summary of the

previous quarter's activities and accomplishments, as well as the

proposed activities for the upcoming quarter. Any decisions and actions

required in the upcoming quarter should be included in the report. The

grantee shall supply the progress report to the Contracting Officer's

Technical Representative (COTR) every ninety (90) days, following date

of award.

b. Problem Identification Report, Program Implementation and

Evaluation Plan: The grantee shall submit a problem identification

report, program implementation and evaluation plan no more than 9

months after award of this agreement, or as soon as the Safe

Communities program has completed the problem identification activity,

has determined what traffic safety problem or problems will be

addressed, and determined what program or programs will be implemented

to reduce the traffic-related injuries. The NHTSA COTR will review and

comment on this plan.

The plan should describe the problem identification effort (data

sources used, how analyzed, and the results including costs of traffic

injuries to the community), how the communities traffic injury problems

and proposed solutions were determined, how input was obtained from

citizens, and how the program will be evaluated. This final evaluation

plan should describe how the effectiveness of the Safe Communities

program will be determined and how the process issues involved in

establishing and implementing a Safe Communities program will be

determined.

c. Dissemination Plan:

i. Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual: The grantee shall

prepare a Draft Final Report that includes a description of the

community (including the traffic safety problem and data sources to

support the problem), partners, intervention strategies, program

implementation, evaluation methodology and findings from the program

evaluation. The grantee shall also prepare a Draft Process Manual

describing what happened in the community in establishing a safe

communities approach to traffic injury. In terms of technology

transfer, it is important to know what worked and did not work, under

what circumstances, and what can be done to avoid potential problems in

implementing community programs. This Process Manual shall contain the

``lessons learned'' in establishing a safe community. The grantee shall

submit the Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to the COTR 90

days prior to the end of the performance period. The COTR will review

each draft document and provide comments to the grantee within 30 days

of receipt of the documents.

ii. Final Report and Process Manual: The grantee shall revise the

Draft Final Report and Draft Process Manual to reflect the COTR's

comments. The revised documents shall be delivered to the COTR on or

before the end of the performance period. The grantee shall supply the

COTR one camera-ready copy, one computer disk copy in WordPerfect

format, and four additional hard copies of each revised document.

iii. Meetings and Briefings: The grantee shall plan for one to two

briefings per year at NHTSA headquarters in Washington, D.C. with the

COTR and other interested parties. The grantee shall also participate

in one or two technology sharing/problem solving sessions with the

NHTSA COTR, other interested parties and the other Safe Communities

grantees per year in Washington, D.C. or some central location. In

addition, the grantee shall plan for a presentation at one or more

national meetings (e.g., APHA, Lifesavers . . .) per year.

iv. Professional Journal Paper: The grantee shall prepare and

submit at least one paper for publication in a professional journal if

deemed appropriate by the COTR.

3. During the effective performance period of cooperative

agreements awarded as a result of this announcement, the agreement as

applicable to the grantee, shall be subject to the National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration's General Provisions for Assistance

Agreements.

Issued on: February 7, 1997.

James Hedlund,

Associate Administrator for Traffic Safety Programs.

[FR Doc. 97-3510 Filed 2-11-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-M