[Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 45, Volume 1]

[Revised as of October 1, 2006]

From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access

[CITE: 45CFR63.6]



[Page 160-162]

 

                        TITLE 45--PUBLIC WELFARE

 

                    SUBTITLE A--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                           AND HUMAN SERVICES

 

PART 63_GRANT PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY FOR PLANNING AND EVALUATION--Table of Contents

 

                            Subpart A_General

 

Sec.  63.6  Evaluation of applications.



    (a) Review procedures. All applications filed in accordance with 

Sec.  63.3 shall be evaluated by the Assistant Secretary through 

officers, employees, and such experts or consultants engaged for this 

purpose as he/she determines are specially qualified in the areas of 

research pursued by this office. The evaluation criteria below will be 

supplemented each fiscal year by a program announcement outlining 

priorities and objectives for policy research, and by other general or 

specialized solicitations. Such supplements may modify the criteria in 

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section to provide greater specificity or 

otherwise improve their applicability to a given announcement or 

solicitation.

    (b) Criteria for evaluation of Policy Research Projects. Review of 

applications under paragraph (a) of this section will take into account 

such factors as:



[[Page 161]]



    (1) Scientific merit and the significance of the project in relation 

to policy objectives;

    (2) Feasibility of the project;

    (3) Soundness of research design, statistical technique, and 

procedures and methodology;

    (4) Theoretical and technical soundness of the proposed plan of 

operation including consideration of the extent to which:

    (i) The objectives of the proposed project are sharply defined, 

clearly stated, and capable of being attained by the proposed 

procedures;

    (ii) The objectives of the proposed project show evidence of 

contributing to the achievement of policy objectives;

    (iii) Provisions are made for adequate evaluation of the 

effectiveness of the project and for determining the extent to which the 

objectives are accomplished; and

    (iv) Appropriate provisions are made for satisfactory inservice 

training connected with project services.

    (5) Expected potential for utilizing the results of the proposed 

project in other projects or programs for similar purposes;

    (6) Sufficiency of size, scope, and duration of the project so as to 

secure productive results;

    (7) Adequacy of qualifications and experience, including managerial, 

of personnel;

    (8) Adequacy of facilities and other resources; and

    (9) Reasonableness of estimated cost in relation to anticipated 

results.

    (c) Criteria for evaluation of Telecommunications Demonstrations 

Projects. Review of applications for Telecommunications Demonstrations 

grants will take into account such factors as are listed in paragraphs 

(c) (1) through (10) of this section. Each applicant must include in the 

application, prior to final evaluation by the Assistant Secretary, 

documentation indicating specifically and separately how and to what 

extent each of these criteria have been or will be met:

    (1) That the project for which application is made demonstrates 

innovative methods or techniques of utilizing nonbroadcast 

telecommunications equipment or facilities to satisfy the purpose of 

this authority;

    (2) That the project will have original research value which will 

demonstrate to other potential users that such methods or techniques are 

feasible and cost-effective;

    (3) That the services to be provided are responsive to local needs 

as identified and assessed by the applicant;

    (4) That the applicant has assessed existing telecommunications 

facilities (if any) in the proposed service area and explored their use 

of interconnection in conjunction with the project;

    (5) That there is significant local commitment (e.g., evidence of 

support, participation, and contribution by local institutions and 

agencies) to the proposed project, indicating that it fulfills local 

needs, and gives some promise that operational systems will result from 

successful demonstrations and will be supported by service recipients or 

providers;

    (6) That demonstrations and related activities assisted under this 

section will remain under the administration and control of the 

applicant;

    (7) That the applicant has the managerial and technical capability 

to carry out the project for which the application is made;

    (8) That the facilities and equipment acquired or developed pursuant 

to the applications will be used substantially for the transmission, 

distribution, and delivery of health, education, or social service 

information, and that use of such facilities and equipment may be shared 

among these and additional public or other services;

    (9) That the provision has been made to submit a summary and factual 

evaluation of the results of the demonstration at least annually for 

each year in which funds are received, in the form of a report suitable 

for dissemination to groups representative of national health, 

education, and social service telecommunications interests; and,

    (10) That the project has potential for stimulating cooperation and 

sharing among institutions and agencies, both within and across 

disciplines.



[[Page 162]]



    (d) Applicant's performance on prior award. Where the applicant has 

previously received an award from the Department of Health and Human 

Services, the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with requirements 

applicable to such prior award as reflected in past written evaluation 

reports, memoranda on performance, and completeness of required 

submissions: Provided, That in any case where the Assistant Secretary 

proposes to deny assistance based upon the applicant's noncompliance 

with requirements applicable to a prior award, he shall do so only after 

affording the applicant reasonable notice and an opportunity to rebut 

the proposed basis for denial of assistance.



[40 FR 23295, May 29, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 36149, July 13, 1977]