Title II Formula Grant

Pursuant to Title II, Part B of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA), in order to receive formula grants, states must develop and submit a Three-Year Plan that identifies goals for the juvenile justice system and programmatic priorities to be supported by grant funding. Therefore, ICJI will only consider grant applications that fall under one of the following priority areas AND have the greatest impact on Hoosier youth.

Indiana has identified the following priority areas for 2023 Title II funding. Applicants must select only one of the priority areas per grant application. However, entities are eligible to submit multiple grant applications if they wish to address more than one priority area in separate grant programs.

1. After-School Programs: Programs that provide at-risk youth and youth in the juvenile justice systems with a range of age-appropriate activities, including tutoring, mentoring, and other educational and enrichment activities.


2. Compliance Monitoring: Programs, research, staff support, or other activities primarily to enhance or maintain a state's ability to adequately monitor jails, detention facilities, and other facilities to assure compliance with the Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders (DSO), separation, and jail removal requirements at 42 U.S.C. § 5633(a)(11), (12), (13), and (22) of the JJDP Act.


3. Delinquency Prevention: Comprehensive juvenile justice and delinquency prevention programs that meet the needs of youth through collaboration of the many local systems before which a youth may appear, including schools, courts, law enforcement agencies, child protection agencies, mental health agencies, welfare services, health care agencies and private nonprofit agencies offering youth services.


4. Indigent Defense: Projects designed to develop and implement programs to protect the rights of youth affected by the juvenile justice system.


5. Juvenile Justice System Improvement: Programs, research, and other initiatives to examine issues or improve practices, policies, or procedures on a system-wide basis (e.g., examining problems affecting decisions from arrest to disposition and detention to corrections).


6. Mental Health Services for Youth in Custody: Programs providing mental health services for youth in custody in need of services, including, but not limited to, assessment, development of individualized treatment plans, and discharge plans. These programs must have the goal of identifying and intervening for the benefit of youth who are at risk of developing emotional/behavioral problems because of mental stress.


7. Mentoring, Counseling, and Training Programs: Programs to develop and sustain a consistent, prosocial relationship between a responsible adult (a mentor) and an at-risk youth, a youth who has offended, or a youth who has contact with a parent or legal guardian who is/was incarcerated (a mentee). These programs may support academic tutoring, vocational and technical training, and drug and violence prevention counseling.


8. Racial and Ethnic Disparities: Programs, research, or other initiatives primarily aimed at addressing the disproportionate number of youth members of minority groups who come into contact with the juvenile justice system, pursuant to 34 U.S.C. § 11133(a)(15) .

There is a 10% match (cost sharing) requirement for this Title II grant opportunity.

Federal law prohibits the use of federal funds from certain activities irrespective of the federal funding source or the specifics of the grant program. These prohibitions include but may not be limited to:

1. Lobbying, including attempts to influence legislation or the outcome of any federal, state, or local elections. Recent changes to the law have expanded the prohibition to any federally appropriated funding used, either directly or indirectly, to support the enactment, repeal, modification, or adoption of any law, regulation, or policy, at any level of government, without the express written approval of OJP. Violations of this prohibition are now subject to civil fines of up to $100,000 per violation.


2. Fundraising (including financial campaigns, endowment drives, solicitation of gifts and bequests, and similar expenses incurred solely to raise capital or obtain contributions).


3. The direct or indirect support of any contract or subaward to either the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) or its subsidiaries, without the express prior written approval of OJP.


4. Funds may not be used to discriminate against or denigrate the religious or moral beliefs of victims who participate in programs for which financial assistance is provided from those funds, or of the parents or legal guardians of such victims.

Supplanting Prohibited: Federal funds must be used to supplement existing state or local funds for program activities and may not replace state or local funds that have been appropriated or allocated for the same purpose. Additionally, federal funding may not replace state or local funding that is required by law. If a question of supplanting arises, the applicant or subgrantee will be required to substantiate that the reduction in non-federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or expected receipt of federal funds.

The U.S. Office of Justice Programs (OJP) strongly emphasizes the use of data and evidence in policy making and program development in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services. OJP is committed to:

• Improving the quantity and quality of data and evidence OJP generates.


• Integrating evidence into program, practice, and policy decisions within OJP and the field.


• Improving the translation of evidence into practice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) encourages the use of evidence-based programs and practices. Evidence-based programs and practices generally have one or more rigorous outcome evaluations that demonstrate effectiveness by measuring the relationship between the program and its intended outcome(s). This includes measuring the direction and size of a change in outcome and the extent to which a change may be attributed to the activity or intervention. The methodology of the evaluation should rule out, to the extent possible, alternative explanations for the documented change. Please refer to the CrimeSolutions.gov website and the OJJDP Model Programs Guide for more information about evidence-based programs in criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services.

For purposes of this solicitation, please be cognizant of the following definitions:

• “Juvenile justice” refers to activities concerning: (1) the prevention or reduction of juvenile delinquency; (2) the apprehension and adjudication of juvenile offenders; (3) the disposition of juvenile offenders including protective techniques and practices; (4) the prevention of child abuse and neglect; and (5) the discovery, protection, and disposition of children in need of services (Indiana Code § 5-2-6-1).


• “Youth” means any individual who is under juvenile court jurisdiction or is an age at which he or she could be subject to original juvenile court jurisdiction within the state of Indiana.