[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-16284]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: July 6, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Social Security Administration
Federal Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance
[Program Announcement No. SSA-ORS- 94-1]
AGENCY: Social Security Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Announcement of the availability of fiscal year 1994 funds for
Section 1110 research grants.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Social Security Administration (SSA) announces that
competing applications will be accepted for new research grants
authorized under Section 1110 of the Social Security Act. This
announcement, consisting of three parts, describes the nature of the
grant activities and gives notice of the anticipated availability of
fiscal year (FY) 1994 funds in support of the proposed activities. Part
I discusses the purpose of the announcement and briefly describes the
application process. Part II describes the programmatic priorities
under which SSA is soliciting applications for funding. Part III
describes the application process and provides guidance on how to
submit an application.
DATES: The closing date for the receipt of grant applications in
response to this announcement is September 6, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR BACKGROUND MATERIAL CONTACT: Ms. Faye Aziz,
Coordinator for Extramural Research; Office of Research and Statistics;
Social Security Administration; Van Ness Center, room 205; 4301
Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20008; telephone (202) 282-
7215.
Part I. Purpose and the Grants Process
A. Program Purpose
This research is intended to add to existing knowledge and to
improve methods and techniques for the management, administration, and
effectiveness of SSA programs. Professionals in actuarial science,
demography, economics, sociology and related fields are potential users
of the results.
In general, SSA will fund types of projects that relate to or
examine:
1. Women's issues, especially aged women in poverty.
2. Economic and demographic assumptions used in making projections
for the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust
Funds.
3. Issues related to an increase in the retirement age.
4. Issues, using the New Beneficiary Data System, on how aged
individuals become poor and how the economic status of individuals with
disabilities and their families change.
5. Issues related to differences in calculated poverty rates
between the Survey of Income Program Participation (SIPP) and the
Current Population Survey (CPS).
B. FY 1994 Grant Process
The grant application process for FY 1994 will consist of a one-
stage, full application. Applications are limited to 20 single- or 40
double-spaced pages (excluding resumes, forms, etc.) and must relate to
the selection criteria established for review of applications.
Priority areas in this announcement permit applicants to propose
research efforts from 12 to 24 months in duration. In item 11 of the
Face Sheet (page 1 of form SSA-96-BK) indicate the priority area under
which the application is submitted, i.e., ORS-94-001, ORS-94-002, etc.
Part II. Priority Research Areas
In particular, the following projects will be considered for
funding:
A. Economic Circumstances of Aged Widows--ORS-94-001
A high proportion of the elderly who are economically vulnerable
are widowed women. Although as a group they experience one of the
highest rates of poverty, approximately three-quarters of widows aged
65 or older are not poor. Data from the SIPP provide an opportunity to
understand the economic circumstances of aged widows and to identify
those factors that are associated with their late-life poverty.
Proposals are sought for SIPP-based research that conducts two
types of analyses of the poverty of aged widows. The first of these
tasks is to provide a comprehensive description of the personal,
financial, and environmental characteristics of poor elderly widows.
These characteristics will include details of income amounts and
specific sources, assets, personal and household characteristics (e.g.,
age, race, education, work history, fertility history, welfare
recipiency history, health status, urban vs rural location, age at
which widowhood occurred). This descriptive material should compare and
contrast the incidence of poverty and its circumstances for aged widows
with similar measures for single elderly women who have never married,
aged married women, and, where sample size permits, elderly divorced
women.
The second task is to simulate the resulting economic scenario for
married women aged 65 or older in the event of the death of their
husbands. This will involve projecting the time path of income and
assets for the widow, given the couple's economic circumstances at time
of the SIPP interviews. The hypothetical widow's income should be based
on Social Security and Supplemental Security Income program rules, any
pension income she has earned in her own right, whether a husband with
public or private pension rights has elected a survivor's option, asset
income, the couple's life insurance holdings, and so forth. It is
expected that, where possible, the economic status of the couple prior
to the husband's death will be related to factors such as lifetime work
experience of each spouse, current health status and health insurance
coverage, etc. In addition, various scenarios for asset decumulation
associated with health expenditures brought on by the husband's death
might be introduced to account for reduced assets subsequently
available to the surviving spouse [See Linda Del Bene and Denton R.
Vaughan, ``Income, Assets and Health Insurance: Economic Resources for
Meeting Acute Health Care Needs of the Aged,'' Social Security
Bulletin, Spring 1992]. We are interested in learning how the economic
status of aged widows compares with their circumstances prior to the
husband's death, whether particular background factors can be used to
predict which married women are particularly at risk of poverty in
their old age, and how the incomes and assets of widows change as the
duration of widowhood increases.
Grant proposals must be based on well-developed rigorous analysis.
Applications may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24
months in duration.
The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the
availability of FY funds.
It is anticipated that an amount up to $100,000 will be allocated
to fund one project under this priority area for the initial 12-month
budget period.
B. Selected Economic and Demographic Assumptions Used to Project the
Financial Status of the OASDI Trust Funds--ORS-94-002
The annual reports of the Board of Trustees of the Federal OASDI
Trust Funds contain long-range, 75-year projections on the financial
status of the trust funds. The assumptions and methodology underlying
those projections were reviewed by the Panel of Technical Experts (the
Panel) convened by the quadrennial Advisory Council on Social Security
and recommendations for research were made. (The ``Social Security
Technical Panel Report to the 1991 Advisory Council on Social
Security'' and its appendices were reprinted in the November and
December 1990 issues of the Social Security Bulletin.)
To address some of the Panel's recommendations for research, the
principal topics of this priority are to better understand: (i) the
determinants of changes in productivity and earnings, and how to
develop better methods of projecting future productivity and earnings;
(ii) the determinants of nominal and real interest rates and of how to
project them; (iii) the determinants of fertility and how to project
future fertility rates; (iv) the determinants of mortality and how to
project future mortality rates; (v) the analysis of illegal immigration
and how to project such immigration; and (vi) the conceptual framework
for the current low-cost and high-cost projections.
Among the questions to be addressed on productivity and earnings
are: What are the determinants of linkages between productivity and
earnings, particularly hours of work and fringe benefits? What are the
effects of the changing quality (including the question of measuring
quality) and demographic mix of the labor force? What are the effects
of research and development by both the public and the private sectors?
What are the effects of capital formation by the public sector (e.g.,
public infrastructure) and by the private sector? What is the effect of
the increasing integration of U.S. and foreign markets? Are there
analytical methods or strategies for selecting which averaging periods
are most appropriate in determining the various economic assumptions?
What is the long-term relationship, if any, between productivity and
earnings and other economic and demographic factors?
Among the questions to be addressed on nominal and real interest
rates are: To what extent can the current structure of interest rates
be used to predict future interest rates? What are the determinants of
inflation and are there analytical methods for projecting future
inflation rates? What strategies are optimal for incorporating both
historical and current interest rate information into the projections?
What is the long-term relationship, if any, between nominal and real
interest rates and other economic and demographic variables?
Among the questions to be addressed on fertility patterns in this
priority area are: What are the determinants of fertility and changes
in fertility? What is the relationship between age at first birth and
the total fertility rate? How do birth rates of immigrants and of their
children compare with those of non-immigrants and their children? Will
future trends in fertility rates by race and ethnic group mirror past
trends? For assumptions used in projecting fertility, can an analytical
framework be developed to help decide how much weight to put on long-
term trend information and how much weight to put on the most recent
trends? Is there empirical evidence supporting alternative weighting
schemes?
Among those questions to be addressed on mortality are: What are
the determinants of mortality and rates of change in mortality? What
evidence is there for projecting changes in mortality for specific
causes (e.g., cancer, heart, etc.) based on changes in smoking,
nutrition, and other lifestyle patterns? For assumptions used in
projecting mortality, can an analytical framework be developed to help
decide how much weight to put on long-term trend information and how
much weight to put on the most recent trends? Is there empirical
evidence supporting alternative weighting schemes?
Among the questions to be addressed on illegal immigrants are:
Estimates of current numbers, labor-force participation rates, and
rates of immigration of illegal immigrants; analysis of factors likely
to affect future immigration rates of illegal immigrants and
projections based on this analysis; the length of coverage and average
earnings of illegal immigrants and the length of time they remain in
the country; and the extent to which illegal immigrants receive
benefits based upon their coverage under the system.
Among the questions to be asked with respect to the conceptual
framework for the current low-cost and high-cost projections are:
Although theoretically, the current low-cost and high-cost projections
represent a collection of extreme values for each of the variables, how
should these bounds be interpreted--as absolute bounds on what could
possibly happen, as confidence levels, as illustrative alternative
projections, or as sensitivity analyses? (Attention should be given to
the way in which rates of inflation are incorporated into the low-cost
and high-cost projections.) Should the projections incorporate
interrelationships among the economic and demographic variables (for
example, among others, interactions among fertility, marital status,
labor force participation, and birth expectations), and if so, which
interrelationships are critical, and how should they be incorporated?
Grant proposals must be based on well-developed rigorous analysis.
Applications may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24
months in duration.
The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the
availability of FY funds.
It is anticipated that up to $240,000 will be allocated to fund one
or more projects under this priority area for the initial 12-month
budget period.
C. Issues Related to the Scheduled Increase in the Retirement Age--ORS-
94-003
The Social Security Amendments of 1983 (Public Law 98-21) provide
for a gradual increase in the age at which unreduced retired-workers
benefits are first payable (for brevity, the retirement age) from 65 to
67 between the years 2000 and 2027. Benefits for retired workers still
will be available at age 62, but the amount payable will be gradually
reduced from the currently payable 80 percent of the unreduced benefit
to 70 percent. It has further been proposed to speed up the phase-in to
a higher retirement age, and to increase the retirement age to 68 (70
in one proposal). At least one proposal also increases the early
retirement age to 65. (The executive summary of the report mandated by
Congress and consultant reports were reprinted in the October 1986 and
February 1987 issues of the Social Security Bulletin.)
1. The increase in retirement age is based on the assumption that
the increase in life expectancy has been accompanied by a corresponding
improvement in health and capacity to work. But past studies are
inconclusive about the relationship between longevity and work ability,
especially among persons in their sixties. Proposals are sought to
further investigate these relationships, using either new approaches,
more current data, and/or new databases.
One possible approach would be to use microdata collected by the
National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to examine trends in health and
ability to work. Data should be presented for subgroups of major
interest for the retirement age issue (both early and normal
retirement), subject to sampling error problems. A wide range of
variables that measure health and ability to work should be included.
2. The retirement-age increase may also impact on the Social
Security Disability Insurance (DI) program. Studies are needed to
address questions such as: (i) what is the expected impact on the
number of DI beneficiaries and their duration on the rolls and on the
DI Trust Fund; (ii) how many workers would qualify for DI benefits at
age 65 and 66 and how many would elect to receive benefits; and (iii)
among those aged 62-64 who do not now elect to apply for DI benefits,
how many might do so because of the additional reduction in benefits
for early retirement that accompanies a retirement-age increase
(including the elimination in some proposals of early benefits for
workers aged 62-64)?
Grant proposals must be based on well-developed, rigorous analysis.
Applicants may submit applications for funding not to exceed 17 months
in duration.
The applications should include a budget for the total period of
the grant (not to exceed 17 months). If the application is approved, a
grant will be awarded for the entire budget period of the grant. It is
anticipated that up to $190,000 will be allocated to fund one or more
projects for up to 17 months under this priority area.
D. Analyses of the New Beneficiary Data System--ORS-94-004
This project is intended to encourage research with the New
Beneficiary Data System (NBDS) developed by SSA over the past decade to
study the changing circumstances of aged and disabled beneficiaries.
Based initially on a survey of new beneficiaries at the beginning of
the 1980's, the dataset has been expanded with information from
administrative records (on benefits, covered earnings, Supplemental
Security Income, and Medicare) and followup interviews with survivors
from the original survey. With the exception of the Medicare records,
all administrative data have been obtained both for respondents and
spouses.
The original sample contained representative samples of new Social
Security beneficiaries who filed for benefits as retired workers,
disabled workers, wives, widows, divorced wives, and surviving divorced
wives. There was also a representative sample of persons aged 65 and
over who were entitled to Medicare benefits but who had not yet
received Social Security cash benefits. The aged sample was, for the
most part, in its mid- to late-60's in 1982 and in its mid- to late-
70's in 1991. Some of the sample members were affected by the ``notch''
that was created when legislation was enacted to correct for an
overcompensation in the benefit formula for inflation.
The original interview covered a wide range of topics, including
demographic characteristics, marital and childbearing history,
employment history, current income (in the format of the SIPP) and
assets, and health. The followup interview, in addition to asking many
of the same questions as the original interview, collected a history of
critical events since 1982 (such as widowhood or divorce, work
cessation, migration, and the sale of the home) and the financial
impact of these critical events. The original health items of work
disability, functional capacity, and presence of major diseases were
expanded to assess specific Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental
Activities of Daily Living, private health insurance provisions, and
the longest experience in a long-term care facility. Disabled workers
who returned to work were asked about their job search experience,
employer accommodations to their disability, and their use of
vocational and rehabilitation services.
Background material and a compilation of reports based on the 1982
New Beneficiary Survey are available. These reports were also published
in various editions of the Social Security Bulletin from 1983 to 1993.
Using the NBDS, the following projects will be considered for
funding:
1. Understanding How Aged Beneficiaries Become Poor
Although poverty rates among the aged have declined substantially
over the last 30 years, there are still some troublesome problems and
poverty among aged women is a particular concern. Various legislative
proposals have been made or discussed to improve the treatment of women
under the Social Security program, including care-giving credits,
increasing benefits at some age, eliminating the actuarial reduction
for early benefit receipt at some age, modifying the Social Security
special minimum benefit, and redesigning couple benefits in order to
enhance survivor benefits. However, many of the proposals are not well
targeted to the poor. Proposals for research are sought to increase our
understanding of why aged beneficiaries, and especially aged women,
become poor, which will improve our ability to form policy in this
area.
Some of the key research questions are: To what extent is aged
poverty a continuation of a lifetime of low income? To what extent is
aged poverty a result of aged couples decumulating assets as they age?
What are the economic effects of widowhood, including the extent to
which sources of income are lost or reduced, and the extent to which
high health care expenditures surrounding the death of a spouse are a
major cause of high poverty rates among the aged who have become
widowed? Is the type of social security benefit received (retired
worker benefits, wife or widow benefits, worker benefits that are
supplemented because of entitlement to a higher spouse or survivor
benefit and those that are not, retirement benefits that were converted
from a disability benefit at age 65 and those that were not) related to
differing poverty rates in 1982, and are those patterns the same among
beneficiaries 10 years later? How different is the role of major
sources of income (including social security, other pensions, asset
income, earnings, and Supplemental Security Income--an SSA-administered
``safety net'' program) in 1991 than it was in 1982?
2. Changing Economic Status of Individuals With Disabilities and Their
Families
We know that newly disabled individuals in 1982 were less well-off
than newly retired individuals in terms of both income and assets.
However, little or no research has been done to follow disabled
individuals over time to determine whether they have particular
problems maintaining an adequate standard of living. The well-being of
many individuals with disabilities depends not only on their own income
but also on the income and/or services provided by family members, such
as the earnings of spouses, or help with activities of daily living
that may mean the difference between living in the community and having
to be institutionalized.
Among the questions to be addressed are: How adequate are the
income and assets of individuals with disabilities just after benefit
receipt and 10 years later? To what extent do disabled individuals
maintain their economic status over this period of time? What factors
are associated with changes in economic status over the period? How do
family members affect the economic status of disabled workers?
Analyses should include background factors (such as demographic
characteristics, previous occupational characteristics and earnings,
living arrangements, family characteristics, and health conditions),
major changes in life circumstances (such as widowhood or divorce,
changes in living arrangements, or a spouse changing hours of work or
retiring), sources of income, changes in the health status, and health-
care costs and how these factors relate to various economic outcomes.
Proposals should identify the expected methods of analysis, the
possible variables to be considered, and the logic for inclusion.
Application may be submitted for multi-year funding not to exceed 24
months in duration.
The applications for multi-year funding should include a budget for
the first budget period (not to exceed 12 months). If the application
is approved, a grant will be awarded for the initial 12-month budget
period. Funding will subsequently be provided for an additional 12-
month budget period dependent on satisfactory performance of the
initial budget period, continued relevance of the project, and the
availability of FY funds.
It is anticipated that up to $190,000 will be allocated to fund one
or more projects for the initial 12-month budget period under this
priority area.
E. Documenting and Explaining SIPP-CPS Differences in Aged Poverty
Rates--ORS-94-005
The official poverty measure and its three derivative statistics
(poverty counts, poverty rates and poverty gaps) are important and
frequently used criteria employed in the formulation of policy and the
evaluation of program outcomes for the aged and disabled populations
served by SSA.
Twelve-month poverty rates based on the SIPP are somewhat lower for
many population subgroups than the poverty rates estimated from the
CPS. Much of the comparison of poverty rates from the two surveys has
been based on the first operational SIPP panel (the 1984 panel) which
pertained to the 1983-85 time period. In the 1984 panel context, SIPP-
CPS poverty rate differences for the aged, were, if anything, less
marked than for younger age groups. Based on a review of published
poverty rate estimates based on SIPP panels for 1985-1990 and
comparison to corresponding estimates based on the CPS, it appears that
a significant change in the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in poverty
rates appeared with the introduction of the 1985 SIPP panel. Key
features of the change in the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in
poverty rates include: 1) a modest decline in the poverty rate for all
ages in the SIPP relative to the CPS; 2) a much more marked SIPP-CPS
difference in poverty rates for the aged than the nonaged (with SIPP
rates for the aged ranging between 28 and 34 percent below those based
on the CPS); 3) a marked attenuation of the tendency for poverty rates
to increase strongly with age among those age 65 and older in the SIPP
context as compared with the CPS. Furthermore, preliminary research
conducted at SSA indicates that SIPP--CPS poverty rate differences
among the aged appear to vary significantly by sex, age, marital
status, race and ethnicity; differences appear to be particularly
marked for persons who are married, white, or age 85 or older.
Studies are needed (1) to describe more fully the pattern of SIPP--
CPS differences in poverty estimates for the aged, and (2) to
establish, if possible, the factors giving rise to the observed
differences. SIPP-CPS differences should be delineated for population
subgroups defined in terms of salient characteristics such as marital
status, more broadly defined aspects of family composition, including
the presence of nonaged family members, age, race and ethnicity.
Differences should, at a minimum, be characterized in terms of poverty
counts, rates, and the poverty gap. Particular attention should be
given to evaluating possible differences between the two surveys in the
portrayal of poverty as it relates to increasing age. Given that the
pattern of poverty by population subgroup is of particular interest,
the relatively small sample size available in single SIPP panels as
compared with the CPS is likely to be of some concern. If, as is
suggested by review of published estimates, it can be shown that the
basic patterns of SIPP-CPS differences are stable across the post-1984
SIPP panels, serious consideration should be given to pooling the post-
1984 panels in order to support as detailed a subgroup analysis as is
possible, given the substantially larger sample sizes available from
pooled samples. If the combining of SIPP panels seems feasible, the
combined panels should be employed to support the explanatory phase of
the overall study, as well.
After developing a plan for documenting more fully SIPP-CPS
differences in the portrayal of poverty among the aged, the grantee
might discuss how the observed differences might be explained. In this
regard a critical review of the literature that has considered the
differences between poverty rate estimates from the Panel Study of
Income Dynamics (PSID) and the CPS might prove quite useful in
generating hypotheses and in formulating empirical approaches to
testing the hypotheses. While several possible factors are likely to be
suggested by this review (e.g., sample weighting, particularly that
component of the overall weighting scheme designed to deal with panel
attrition; differing operationalizations of the income unit; differing
income concepts; and the quality of income data), emphasis in empirical
work should be given to the last factor, the relative quality of the
income data from the two surveys. However, some attention could also be
given to the change in SIPP-CPS differences in poverty estimates that
occurred with the introduction of the 1985 SIPP panel.1 The nature
of each hypothesized factor to be considered and how it might cause the
observed pattern of SIPP-CPS differences might be described. A closely
reasoned plan for empirically assessing the possible impact data
quality on the differences in SIPP-CPS poverty rates for the aged may
be presented. Particular emphasis should be given to explaining the
relevance of each proposed test for clarifying the observed pattern of
SIPP-CPS differences, notwithstanding the fact that it may not be
possible to devise fully unambiguous tests of the effects of income
data quality on the observed SIPP-CPS differences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The prospective grantee will find it useful to consult recent
work conducted by the Bureau of the Census comparing income
estimates for calendar year 1990 from the two surveys and Report no.
17, Studies in Income Distribution, for similar material related to
SIPP/CPS differences for the 1983-84 period. Recent work conducted
at the Bureau of the Census by Lamas, Tin and Eargle about the
effect of attrition in the SIPP context on differences in SIPP-CPS
poverty rates should also be consulted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the level of available funding, empirical work should be
limited to describing the pattern of SIPP-CPS differences in poverty
estimates (rates, counts, and gaps).
As much of the study will revolve around comparison of alternative
estimates within or between survey contexts, issues of statistical
inference also need to be given careful consideration. In particular,
given the results of SSA research on the variance properties of SIPP-
based estimates of the aged, standard errors for SIPP estimates should
be based on the generalized variance parameters as estimated by SSA
(see the note by Bye and Gallicchio appearing in the winter 1993 Social
Security Bulletin) or calculated directly from the survey file using
the methods outlined in the Bye-Gallicchio article.
Grant proposals must be based on well-developed, rigorous analysis.
Applicants may submit applications for funding not to exceed 17 months
in duration.
The applications should include a budget for the total period of
the grant (not to exceed 17 months). If the application is approved, a
grant will be awarded for the entire budget period of the grant.
It is anticipated that an amount up to $135,000 will be allocated
to fund one or more projects for up to 17 months under this priority
area.
Note: To foster the sharing of research, principal investigators
for each grant awarded will be required to (1) include in the final
report an executive summary which SSA could publish in the quarterly
Social Security Bulletin and (2) discuss the results of their
research with SSA staff. Funds should be included in the grant
budget for a meeting at the SSA Office of Research and Statistics,
Washington, DC.
Part III. Application Process
A. Eligible Applicants
Any State or local government, public or private organization,
nonprofit or for-profit organization, or agency, hospital, or
educational institution may apply for a grant under this announcement.
Applications will not be accepted from applicants which do not meet the
above eligibility criteria at the time of submission of applications.
Individuals are not eligible to apply. For-profit organizations may
apply with the understanding that no grant funds may be paid as profit
to any grant recipient. Profit is considered as any amount in excess of
the allowable costs of the grant recipient. A for-profit organization
is a corporation or other legal entity which is organized or operated
for the profit or benefit of its shareholders or other owners and must
be distinguishable or legally separable from that of an individual
acting on his/her own behalf.
B. Availability and Duration of Funding
SSA anticipates allocating up to $100,000 to fund the initial 12-
month budget period of a 24-month grant for one project in priority
area ORS-94-001, ``Economic Circumstances of Aged Widows.'' SSA
anticipates allocating up to $240,000 to fund the initial 12-month
budget period for one or more projects in priority area ORS-94-002,
``Selected Economic and Demographic Assumptions Used to Project the
Financial Status of the OASDI Trust Funds.'' SSA anticipates allocating
up to $190,000 to fund one or more projects not to exceed 17 months in
duration in priority area ORS-94-003, ``Issues Related to the Scheduled
Increase in the Retirement Age.'' SSA anticipates allocating up to
$190,000 to fund the initial 12-month budget period of 24-month grants
for one or more projects in priority area ORS-94-004, ``Analysis of the
New Beneficiary Data System.'' Also, SSA anticipates allocating up to
$135,000 to fund one (1) or more projects not to exceed 17 months in
duration in priority area ORS-94-005, ``Documenting and Explaining
SIPP-CPS Differences in Aged Poverty Rates.''
C. Grantee Share of the Project Costs
Grant recipients receiving assistance to conduct these research
projects are expected to contribute towards the project costs.
Generally, 5 percent of the total costs is considered acceptable. No
grant will be awarded that covers 100 percent of the project's costs.
D. The Application Process for Proposals Requesting Grant Funds
Organizations wishing to compete for grants under this announcement
must submit an application by September 6, 1994. Applications received
in response to this announcement will be reviewed by Federal and non-
Federal personnel.
Successful applicants may expect funding during the fourth quarter
of FY 1994 (prior to September 30, 1994).
1. Availability of Application Forms
Application kits which contain the prescribed application forms for
grant funds are available from the Grants Management Staff; Division of
Contract and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and Grants; Social
Security Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710 Gwynn Oak
Avenue; Baltimore, MD 21207; telephone (410) 965-9500; Mr. Lawrence H.
Pullen, Chief, Grants Management Staff.
When requesting an application kit, the applicant should refer to
program announcement number SSA-ORS-94-1 and the date of this
announcement to ensure receipt of the proper application kit.
2. Additional Information
For additional information concerning project development, please
contact Ms. Faye Aziz, Coordinator for Extramural Research; Office of
Research and Statistics; Social Security Administration; Van Ness
Center, Room 205; 4301 Connecticut Avenue, NW; Washington, DC 20008;
telephone (202) 282-7215.
3. Application Submission
All applications requesting Federal grant funds must be submitted
on the standard forms provided by the Grants Management Staff. The
application shall be executed by an individual authorized to act for
the applicant organization and to assume for the applicant organization
the obligations imposed by the terms and conditions of the grant award.
As part of the project title (page 1 of the application form SSA-
96-BK, item 11), the applicant must clearly indicate the application
submitted is in response to this announcement (SSA-ORS-94-1) and must
show the appropriate priority area project identifier (i.e., ORS-94-
001, ORS-94-002 etc.).
Applications must be submitted to: Grants Management Staff;
Division of Contract and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and
Grants; Social Security Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710
Gwynn Oak Avenue; Baltimore, MD 21207.
4. Application Consideration
Applications are initially screened for relevance to this
announcement. If judged irrelevant, the applications are returned to
the applicants. Applications that conform to the requirements of this
program announcement will be reviewed and evaluated against the
criteria specified in No. 6(b) of this announcement and evaluated by
Federal and non-Federal personnel. The results of this evaluation will
assist SSA in selecting the applications to be funded.
5. Application Approval
Grant awards will be issued within the limits of Federal funds
available following the approval of the applications selected for
funding. The official award document is the ``Notice of Grant Award.''
It will provide the amount of funds awarded, the purpose of the award,
the budget period for which support is given, the total project period
for which support is contemplated, the amount of grantee financial
participation, and any special terms and conditions of the grant award.
6. Criteria for Screening and Reviewing of Applications
(a) Screening Requirements. In order for an application to be in
conformance, it must meet all of the following requirements:
(1) Number of Copies: An original signed application and two copies
must be submitted. Five additional copies are optional and will
expedite processing of the grant application.
(2) Length: The narrative portion of the application (Part III of
form SSA-96-BK) must not exceed 20 single- or 40 double-spaced pages,
exclusive of resumes, forms, etc., typewritten on one side only using
standard size (8\1/2\'' x 11'') paper. Applications should neither be
unduly elaborative nor contain voluminous documentation.
(3) Non-Federal Contribution (Match): Grant recipients must
contribute towards the project costs (cash or in-kind). Generally, 5
percent of the total costs is acceptable. SSA will not provide 100
percent or total funding for any project grant.
(b) Evaluation Criteria. Applications which pass the screening
process will be reviewed by at least three individuals. Reviewers will
score the applications, basing their scoring decisions on the criteria
shown below. 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
application. Relative weights for the criteria are shown in
parentheses.
(1) Project Objective: (25 points)
How closely do the project objectives fit those of the
announcement? Is the need for the project discussed in terms of the
importance of the issues to be addressed? Does it describe how the
project builds upon previous research? What is the potential usefulness
of the anticipated result and expected benefits to the target groups?
What is the potential usefulness of the proposed project for the
advancement of scientific knowledge?
(2) Project Design: (30 points)
Is the design of the project adequate and feasible as indicated by
the appropriateness of the work statement and the technical approach,
including: (a) a concise and clear statement of goals and objectives;
(b) theoretical analysis of the problem and, if appropriate, hypotheses
to be tested and/or parameters to be estimated; (c) specification of
data sources; (d) plan for data analysis, including appropriateness of
statistical methods to be used; and (e) scheduling of tasks and
milestones in the progress of the project? Does the proposal describe
specific plans for conducting the project in terms of the tasks to be
performed, and how the approach proposed will accomplish the project
objectives?
(3) Qualifications: (30 points)
Do the qualifications of the project personnel, as evidenced by
training, experience, and publications, demonstrate that they have the
knowledge of subject matter and skills required to competently carry
out the research and to produce a final report that is comprehensible
and usable? Is the staffing pattern appropriate for the proposed
research, linking responsibilities clearly to project tasks?
(4) Organization and Budget: (15 points)
Are the resources needed to conduct the project specified,
including personnel, time, funds, and facilities? Are any collaborative
efforts with other organizations clearly identified and written
assurances referenced? Is all budget information provided, including a
description by category (personnel, travel, etc.) of the total of the
Federal funds required? Where appropriate, are justifications and
explanations of costs provided? Are the project's costs reasonable in
view of the level of effort and anticipated outcome? Does the
applicant's organization have adequate facilities and resources to
plan, conduct, and complete the project?
Please Note: For-profit organizations may not use grant funds to
purchase equipment under the grant. Equipment means tangible, non-
expendable, personal property having a useful life of more than 1
year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit.
7. Closing Date for Receipt of Applications
The closing date for receipt of grant applications for Federal
funds in response to this announcement is September 6, 1994.
Applications may be mailed or sent by commercial carrier or
personally delivered to: Grants Management Staff; Division of Contract
and Grant Operations; Office of Acquisition and Grants; Social Security
Administration; 1-E-4 Gwynn Oak Building; 1710 Gwynn Oak Avenue;
Baltimore, MD 21207.
Hand-delivered applications are accepted during the hours of 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. An application will be
considered as meeting the deadline if it is either:
(a) Received on or before the deadline date at the above address;
or
(b) Mailed through the U.S. Postal Service or sent by commercial
carrier on or before the deadline date and received in time to be
considered during the competitive review and evaluation process.
Applicants are cautioned to request a legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
postmark or to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial carrier
as evidence of timely mailing. Private metered postmarks are not
acceptable as proof of timely mailing.
Applications which do not meet the above criteria are considered
late applications. SSA will notify each late applicant that its
application will not be considered.
Note: Facsimile copies will not be accepted.
Notice Procedures
Paperwork Reduction Act
This notice contains reporting requirements in the ``Application
Process'' section. However, the information is collected using form
SSA-96-BK, Federal Assistance, which has Office of Management and
Budget clearance No. 0960-0184.
Executive Orders 12372 and 12416--Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs
This program is not covered by the requirements of Executive Order
12372, as amended by Executive Order 12416, relating to Federal
agencies providing opportunities for consultation with State and local
elected officials on proposed Federal financial assistance or direct
Federal development.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance: Program No. 93.812, Social
Security-Research and Demonstration)
Dated: June 22, 1994.
Shirley S. Chater,
Commissioner of Social Security.
[FR Doc. 94-16284 Filed 7-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4190-29-P