2011 Census of Adult Probation Supervising Agencies | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1) What is the 2011 Census of Adult Probation Supervising Agencies (CAPSA 2011) grant opportunity?

It is a Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) discretionary funding opportunity (Funding Opportunity Number 2010 BJS 2663) to support one organization, via a cooperative agreement, to carry out a nationwide census of adult probation supervising agencies. The effort is intended to produce a comprehensive national picture of the adult probation supervision landscape.

2) What is the main purpose of CAPSA 2011?

The purpose is to conduct a complete enumeration of every public and private agency that supervises adults on probation, including the separate offices or local units those agencies operate, and to capture consistent information from that full universe for BJS statistical reporting.

3) Who is the awarding agency?

The administering and awarding agency is the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).

4) What is the funding mechanism for this opportunity?

The award is structured as a cooperative agreement (rather than a standard grant), which implies more hands-on federal involvement and ongoing coordination between BJS and the funded organization throughout questionnaire finalization, data collection, and deliverables.

5) How many awards were expected to be made?

BJS planned to make a single award to support one organization to conduct the nationwide census.

6) What is the total estimated funding available?

The estimated total funding amount was $450,000.

7) What was the maximum award amount (ceiling)?

The award ceiling was $450,000.

8) Was there a minimum award amount (floor)?

No award floor was stated in the provided information.

9) Is cost sharing or matching required?

No. There was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

10) What CFDA number was associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity was categorized under CFDA 16.734, Special Data Collections and Statistical Studies.

11) What kinds of organizations were eligible to apply?

Eligibility was open to for-profit (commercial) organizations, nonprofit organizations, faith-based and community organizations, institutions of higher learning, and consortia.

12) Did the opportunity encourage or highlight experience with American Indian and Alaska Native communities?

Yes. The announcement emphasized experience working with American Indian and Alaska Native communities and explicitly included tribal for-profit and nonprofit organizations, tribal colleges and universities, and tribal consortia.

13) Were there special fiscal conditions for for-profit applicants?

Yes. Consistent with Office of Justice Programs (OJP) requirements, for-profit entities could not earn profit from the award or charge a management fee. Reimbursement would be limited to allowable costs directly tied to the work.

14) What work was the funded organization expected to perform?

The funded organization was expected to serve as a specialized data collection agent to run CAPSA 2011, including: developing and maintaining a comprehensive roster of adult probation supervising agencies and their offices; collaborating with BJS to finalize the census questionnaire; conducting nationwide data collection with follow-up; performing quality control; analyzing the resulting data; and producing reporting deliverables consistent with BJS practices.

15) What does "complete enumeration" mean in this context?

It means the census is intended to identify and capture information from every public and private agency that supervises adults on probation, including the separate offices or local units those agencies operate, rather than collecting information from a sample.

16) What is the "roster" and why is it such a major component of the census?

The roster is the full list of adult probation supervising agencies and their offices that make up the census "universe." Roster development is central because it determines which entities must be contacted. The work typically includes detailed research, validation, deduplication, and ongoing updates as agencies reorganize, merge, change names, or shift responsibilities.

17) What role would the funded organization play in questionnaire development?

The awardee was expected to collaborate closely with BJS to finalize the census questionnaire design. The cooperative agreement structure suggests iterative coordination, with BJS providing direction on instrument content, definitions, and data standards while the data collection agent manages execution.

18) What activities were included under data collection?

Data collection activities generally included contacting all identified agencies/offices, administering the questionnaire, conducting follow-up with nonrespondents, resolving inconsistencies, and applying quality control procedures to ensure the results are complete and reliable.

19) What activities were included under analysis?

Analysis work included preparing collected responses for statistical use, checking for errors or missingness, documenting methodology, and summarizing findings in ways consistent with BJS publication practices.

20) What reporting or deliverables were anticipated?

Reporting was expected to culminate in deliverables that communicate results to BJS and, ultimately, the broader justice community, likely including technical documentation and a summary report suitable for public release.

21) What were the key dates for this funding opportunity?

The opportunity was posted on April 28, 2010. The closing date was June 14, 2010. It was archived on July 14, 2010.

22) Who was the listed contact for help accessing the full announcement?

The listed contact was Lisa Price Grear, Program Analyst, at 202-616-3561.

23) What was the overall intent of the award (in plain terms)?

It was essentially a contract-like cooperative research and data collection award to produce a definitive nationwide census dataset describing the agencies responsible for adult probation supervision in 2011.