Liberia Police Accountability Project | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Liberia Police Accountability Project (INL)

1) What is the Liberia Police Accountability Project?

The Liberia Police Accountability Project is a U.S. Department of State grant opportunity issued through the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL). It is designed to address persistent corruption and weak accountability within the Liberia National Police (LNP) by building a practical accountability system that the public can use to report police misconduct and receive outcomes.

2) What problem is this grant opportunity trying to address?

The opportunity targets ongoing corruption and weak accountability within the LNP. A key concern described in the opportunity is that reports of misconduct can be received but not properly tracked, reviewed, or resolved. The project aims to reduce the risk of cases disappearing due to neglect, interference, or limited capacity.

3) What is the central approach or “big idea” behind the project?

The central idea is to work in partnership with the LNP to build a functioning accountability system with two linked parts: (1) a public-facing complaint pathway so members of the public can submit information about mistreatment or abuse, and (2) an internal case-management process so complaints are formally logged, tracked, reviewed, and resolved.

4) Is the project focused only on internal police reforms?

No. The opportunity explicitly emphasizes a public-facing complaint pathway paired with an internal case-management process. The intent is to create a system the public can actually use and that produces tracked, reviewable cases rather than informal reports that are forgotten.

5) What kinds of incidents are intended to be reported through the complaint pathway?

The complaint pathway is meant for situations where members of the public believe they have been mistreated, abused, or otherwise victimized by police officers. The opportunity frames these as reports of police misconduct.

6) What information should be captured in a misconduct report?

The opportunity specifically notes that reports should include details such as when and where an incident occurred. The complaint channels are intended to collect usable information that can be logged and examined.

7) What does the opportunity require regarding complaint intake channels?

A major component is the creation or strengthening of accessible channels for the public to submit information about police misconduct. The channels should be accessible to communities and support submission of relevant incident details.

8) What is meant by a “tracking mechanism” for complaints?

The opportunity calls for a mechanism that ensures every complaint is logged and examined. The purpose is to reduce the risk that cases disappear due to neglect, interference, or lack of capacity and to support formal tracking of progress from intake through resolution.

9) How does the project expect complaints to be handled after they are received?

Complaints should not simply be received and forgotten. The project emphasizes a case-management process where reports are formally tracked, reviewed, and resolved, implying clear internal workflow steps and case status visibility.

10) Does the project require follow-up with the person who made a complaint?

Yes. The opportunity expects a reliable way to communicate outcomes back to the complainant so individuals who report misconduct receive closure and can see that their case moved through a process. It specifically highlights the need for a mechanism ensuring final resolutions are conveyed to complainants.

11) Is public reporting or transparency part of the project design?

Yes. In addition to individual case feedback, the project should support communicating broader patterns or trends to the public. This is meant to build trust and demonstrate measurable accountability results over time.

12) Why is public awareness emphasized in this opportunity?

Public awareness is described as essential, not optional. The opportunity recognizes that communities may not have internet access or may not otherwise know a complaint mechanism exists. Outreach is expected throughout the life of the project to inform people that they can seek redress and explain how to do so.

13) What communication methods does the opportunity specifically expect to be used?

The opportunity specifically includes radio and print advertisements as basic, widely accessible communications methods to inform communities about the complaint process and how to access it.

14) What should outreach communications explain to the public?

The opportunity indicates that outreach would typically include clear instructions on where to report, what information to provide, and what the complainant can expect in terms of follow-up and confidentiality.

15) Which part of the Liberia National Police is a focus for institutional strengthening?

The opportunity places particular emphasis on strengthening the LNP Professional Standards Division (PSD), which is the unit responsible for handling misconduct issues and professional discipline.

16) What kinds of improvements are expected within the Professional Standards Division (PSD)?

The project is meant to improve PSD capacity to track and resolve all cases more effectively. The opportunity implies needs such as better internal workflows, improved recordkeeping, clearer case status visibility, and stronger follow-through from intake to final disposition.

17) How does the opportunity define success beyond individual cases?

Beyond resolving individual complaints and notifying complainants of outcomes, the opportunity points to communicating aggregate trends or broader patterns publicly, reinforcing transparency and demonstrating measurable accountability results over time.

18) What type of federal award is this?

This is a discretionary cooperative agreement.

19) What does it mean that this is a cooperative agreement?

The opportunity states that the U.S. government expects to remain substantially involved during implementation rather than issuing funds and stepping back. This is presented as a defining feature of the cooperative agreement model for this project.

20) Which U.S. government office is issuing this funding opportunity?

The grant opportunity is issued by the U.S. Department of State through the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL).

21) What is the activity category for this program?

The opportunity is listed under the Law, Justice and Legal Services activity category.

22) What is the CFDA number associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity is listed under CFDA number 19.703.

23) Who is eligible to apply for this opportunity?

Eligible applicants include public and state-controlled institutions of higher education, private institutions of higher education, and nonprofit organizations both with and without 501(c)(3) status.

24) Are nonprofits without 501(c)(3) status eligible?

Yes. The opportunity explicitly states that nonprofit organizations with and without 501(c)(3) status are eligible applicants.

25) When was the opportunity created and what was the original closing date?

The opportunity was created on October 27, 2016, and the original closing date was December 31, 2016.

26) How many awards did INL anticipate making?

INL anticipated making a single award.

27) What was the award ceiling for this opportunity?

The award ceiling was up to $1,000,000.

28) What is the official funding opportunity title?

The funding opportunity title is Liberia Police Accountability Project.

29) What is the funding opportunity number?

The funding opportunity number is INL17CA0003 (INLAMELIBERIA 10142016).

30) What practical safeguards does the opportunity mention to prevent cases from being ignored?

The opportunity emphasizes a tracking mechanism so every complaint is logged and examined, along with an internal case-management process that supports formal tracking, review, and resolution. It also requires communicating outcomes to complainants, which creates an expectation of follow-through rather than silent intake.