1. (a) For applications submitted directly to CJD, staff members, or a review group selected by the executive director, will review the applications for eligibility, reasonableness, availability of funding, and cost-effectiveness and give their funding recommendations to the executive director, who will render the final funding decision. A review group may include staff members, experts in a relevant field, and members of an advisory board or council.

2. (b) For applications submitted directly to CJD pursuant to §3.5(b), the executive director will decide whether to fund the application based upon the following factors:

   1. (1) the inherent value of the project's impact;
   2. (2) whether the project has the potential to be a model program; or
   3. (3) whether delaying the application would have a significant negative impact on the immediate need for the project.
3. (c) For applications submitted directly to a COG, the COG's executive committee and CJAC must review and prioritize the applications. The COG then must submit the priority listing and the applications to CJD within the time periods established by CJD. CJD will render final funding decisions on these applications based upon the COG priorities, eligibility, reasonableness, availability of funding, and cost-effectiveness.
4. (d) For applications seeking funding through a COG from the State Criminal Justice Planning Fund, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Fund, or the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Fund, CJD will allocate funding to the COGs through a formula based upon population figures and crime rates. No formula-based funding allocation exists for applications submitted to COGs that seek grants from other funding sources.

5. (e) During the review of an application, CJD or a COG may request that the applicant submit additional information necessary to complete grant review. CJD or a COG may request the applicant to provide any outstanding forms and documents to clarify or justify any part of the application or to disclose other funding sources related to the project. Such requests for information, including the issuance of a preliminary review report, do not serve as notice that CJD intends to fund an application.

   1. (1) If CJD needs additional information on an application submitted through a COG, CJD will send a report requesting the necessary information to the COG, and the applicant must provide the response to the COG by a COG-established deadline.
   2. (2) If CJD needs additional information on an application submitted directly to CJD, CJD will send a report directly to the applicant, and the applicant must provide a response by a CJD-established deadline.
   3. (3) If CJD is not able to adequately resolve problems within an applicant's budget through the preliminary review process, CJD may use its discretion to make the necessary corrections to the budget to bring it into compliance with applicable state or federal requirements. Any corrections to an applicant's budget will be reflected in the award documentation.
6. (f) CJD will inform applicants in writing of funding decisions on their grant applications through either a Statement of Grant Award or a notification of denial. For applications submitted to a COG that do not receive funding recommendations, the COG notification of the decision not to recommend funding serves as the applicant's notification of denial.
7. (g) All funding decisions made by the executive director are final and are not subject to appeal.

Source Note:The provisions of this §3.7 adopted to be effective February 24, 2000, 25 TexReg 1297; amended to be effective September 9, 2001, 26 TexReg 6645; amended to be effective December 16, 2002, 27 TexReg 11729.