Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 60694-60696 [2015-25472]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60694
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Notices
Dated: October 1, 2015.
David Clary,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory
Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–25439 Filed 10–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
In compliance with Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 concerning
opportunity for public comment on
proposed collections of information, the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA)
will publish periodic summaries of
proposed projects. To request more
information on the proposed projects or
to obtain a copy of the information
collection plans, call the SAMHSA
Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276–
1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collections of information
are necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Project: National Outcomes
Evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith
Suicide Prevention Program—Revision
The Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) Center for Mental Health
Services (CMHS) is requesting clearance
for the revision of data collection
associated with the previously-approved
cross-site evaluation of the Garrett Lee
Smith (GLS) Youth Suicide Prevention
and Early Intervention Program (GLS
Suicide Prevention Program), now
entitled National Outcomes Evaluation
(NOE). The NOE is a proposed redesign
of the currently-approved cross-site
evaluation (OMB No. 0930–0286;
Expiration, January 2017) that builds on
prior published GLS evaluation
proximal and distal training and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Oct 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
aggregate findings from program
activities (e.g., Condron et al., 2014;
Walrath et al., 2015). As a result of the
vast body of information collected and
analyzed through the cross-site
evaluation of the two GLS Suicide
Prevention Programs components—the
GLS State/Tribal Program and the GLS
Campus Program—SAMHSA has
identified areas for additional
investigation and the types of inquiry
needed to move the evaluation into its
next phase.
The NOE aims to address the field’s
need for additional evidence on the
impacts of the GLS Suicide Prevention
Program in three areas: (1) Suicide
prevention training effectiveness, (2)
early identification and referral on
subsequent care follow-up and
adherence, and (3) suicide safer care
practices within health care settings.
The evaluation comprises three distinct,
but interconnected core studies—
Training, Continuity of Care (COC), and
Suicide Safer Environment (SSE). The
Training and SSE studies also have
‘‘enhanced’’ study components. Core
study data align with required program
activities across the State/Tribal and
Campus programs and provide
continuity with and utility of data
previously collected (implementation
and proximal outcomes). Enhanced
components use experimental and
quasi-experimental methods
(randomized controlled trial [RCT] and
retrospective cohort study designs) to
truly assess program impacts on distal
outcomes (e.g., identifications and
referrals, hospitalizations, and suicide
attempts and deaths) without undue
burden on grantees and youth. This
outcome- and impact-focused design
reflects SAMHSA’s desire to assess the
implementation, outcomes, and impacts
of the GLS program.
The NOE builds on information
collected through the four-stage crosssite evaluation approach (context,
product, process, and impact) to further
the field of suicide prevention and
mental health promotion. Of notable
importance, the design now accounts for
differences in State/Tribal and Campus
program grant funding cycles (i.e., 5year State/Tribal and 3-year Campus
programs), while also establishing
continuity with and maximizing utility
of data previously collected. Further,
the evaluation meets the legislative
requirements outlined in the GLSMA to
inform performance and
implementation of programs.
Eleven data collection activities
compose the NOE—two new
instruments, three previously-approved
instruments, and six previouslyapproved and improved instruments. As
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
GLS program foci differ by grantee type,
some instruments will apply to either
State/Tribal or Campus programs only.
Of the 11 instruments, 2 will be
administered with State/Tribal and
Campus grantees (tailored to grantee
type), 6 are specific to State/Tribal
grantees, and 3 pertain only to Campus
grantees.
Instrument Removals
Due to the fulfillment of data
collection goals, six currently-approved
instruments and their associated burden
will be removed. The combined
estimated annual burden for these
instruments is 4,300 hours. These
include the State/Tribal Training
Utilization and Preservation Survey.
(TUP–S) Adolescent Version, Coalition
Profile, and Coalition Survey, and the
Campus Training Exit Survey (TES)
Interview Forms, Life Skills Activities
Follow-up Interview, and the Student
Awareness Intercept Survey
Instrument Continuations
Three instruments will be
administered only in OMB Year 1 to
finalize data collection for the current
cross-site evaluation protocol. Each
instrument was previously approved as
part of the four-stage approach (OMB
No. 0930–0286; Expiration, January
2017) and no changes are being made.
These include the State/Tribal Referral
Network Survey (RNS), TUP–S Campus
Version, and Campus Short Message
Service Survey (SMSS). Each
instrument will be discontinued once
the associated data collection
requirement has been fulfilled.
Instrument Revisions
Six currently-approved instruments
will be revised for the NOE. Each of the
instruments, or an iteration thereof, has
received approval through multiple
cross-site evaluation packages cleared
by OMB. As such, the information
gathered has been, and will continue to
be, crucial to this effort and to the field
of suicide prevention and mental health
promotion.
D Prevention Strategies Inventory
(PSI): The PSI has been updated to
enhance the utility and accuracy of the
data collected. Changes capture
different strategies implemented and
products distributed by grantee
programs, the population of focus for
each strategy, total GLS budget
expenditures, and the percent of funds
allocated by the activity type.
D Training Activity Summary Page
(TASP): New items on the TASP gather
information about the use of behavioral
rehearsal and/or role-play and resources
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
60695
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Notices
provided at trainings—practices that
have been found to improve retention of
knowledge and skills posttraining. In
addition, understanding how skills can
be maintained over time with materials
provided at trainings (e.g., video
reminders, wallet cards, online and
phone applications) is an area suggested
for further study (Cross et al., 2011).
D Training Utilization and
Preservation Survey (TUP–S) 3 and 6month follow up: The TUP–S has been
improved to examine posttraining
behaviors and utilization of skills by
training participants—factors known to
improve understanding of the
comprehensive training process and the
impact of training on identifications,
referrals, and service use. The survey
now requests information about training
resources received, practice
components, trainee participation in
role play, and previous suicide
prevention trainings attended;
experience intervening with a suicidal
individual (from QPR evaluation tool),
intended use of the training, and referral
behaviors; and previous contact and
quality of relationships with youth.
Broad items about training others, the
use/intended use of skills, and barriers/
facilitators have been removed. The
consent-to-contact form has been
modified to add brief items about the
trainee and previous identifications/
referrals. The TUP–S will be
administered at 3 and 6 months posttraining to a random sample of training
participants via CATI (2000 ST TUP–S
3-mo/600 ST TUP–S 6-mo per year).
D Early Intervention, Referral, and
Follow-up Individual Form (EIRF–I):
The EIRF–I has been improved to gather
initial follow-up information about
youth identified as being at risk as a
result of the State/Tribal GLS program
(whether or not a service was received
after referral). In addition, EIRF–I (1)
data elements have been expanded to
include screening practices, screening
tools, and screening results of youth
identified as at-risk for suicide; (2)
response options have been expanded/
refined (i.e., setting/source of
identification, mental health and nonmental health referral locations, and
services received); (3) tribal-specific
data elements have been added; and (4)
sources of information used has been
removed.
D EIRF Screening Form (EIRF–S): Data
elements have been added to indicate
whether State/Tribal screenings were
performed at the individual- or grouplevel. New response options have been
added under ‘‘screening tool’’ and ‘‘false
positive’’ has been removed.
D Student Behavioral Health Form
(SBHF): The SBHF (formerly entitled
the MIS) has been expanded and
renamed. The Campus form has been
enhanced to include referral and followup procedure questions (rather than
simply counts); numbers screened,
identified at risk, receiving suicidespecific services, referred, and receiving
follow-up; and age and gender
breakdowns of suicide attempts and
deaths. Student enrollment/retention
items have been removed; these will be
obtained through the Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System.
The SBHF will require closer
involvement with campus behavioral
health/health providers to gather data
on procedural questions and screenings,
risk assessment, services, referrals, and
follow-ups.
Instrument Additions
Four instruments will augment the
evaluation—two are newly developed
instruments and two represent new
versions of existing instruments.
D TUP–S RCT (Baseline and 12Month versions): The TUP–S RCT refers
to versions administered as part of the
Training Study RCT. The RCT collects
TUP–S data at baseline (pre-training)
and 3, 6, and 12 months after training.
Because the surveys are conducted at
different times, each version refers the
participant to a specific time period. All
trainees from States/Tribes participating
in the RCT and who consent to be
contacted will be surveyed until the
desired sample size of 1332 respondents
is achieved. The consent-to-contact form
will describe the RCT and the 4
assessment periods. The consent-tocontact form will describe the RCT and
the 4 assessment periods.
D Behavior Health Provider Survey
(BHPS): The BHPS is a new State/Tribal
data collection activity and the first to
specifically target behavioral health
providers partnering with GLS grantees.
Data will include information about
referrals for at-risk youth, SSE care
practices implemented, and client
outcomes (number of suicide attempts
and deaths). A total of 1–10 respondents
from each State/Tribal grantee’s
partnering behavioral health provider
will participate annually.
The estimated response burden to
collect this information associated with
the redesigned National Outcomes
Evaluation is as follows annualized over
the requested 3-year clearance period is
presented below:
TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED AVERAGES: RESPONDENTS, RESPONSES AND HOURS
Type of respondent
Number of
respondents
Instrument
Responses
per
respondent
Total number
of responses
Burden per
response
(hours)
Annual burden
(hours)
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
STATE/TRIBAL INSTRUMENTS
Project Evaluator
Project Evaluator
Project Evaluator
Project Evaluator
Provider Trainee
Provider Trainee
Provider Trainee
Provider Trainee
Provider Trainee
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
Provider Trainee .................
Provider Trainee .................
Provider Stakeholder ..........
Behavioral Health Provider
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Oct 06, 2015
PSI ......................................
TASP ..................................
EIRF-Individual Form .........
EIRF Screening Form ........
TUP–S Consent to Contact
TUP–S 3 Month Version ....
TUP–S 6 Month Version ....
TUP–S RCT BL Version ....
TUP–S RCT 3 Month
Version.
TUP–S RCT 6 Month
Version.
TUP–S RCT 12 Month
Version.
RNS ....................................
BHPS ..................................
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00085
43
43
43
43
6,000
2,000
600
444
444
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
172
172
172
172
6000
2000
600
444
444
0.750
0.250
0.750
0.750
0.167
0.500
0.417
0.417
0.500
129
43
129
129
1000
1000
250
185
222
444
1
444
0.417
185
444
1
444
0.417
185
26
407
1
1
26
407
0.667
0.750
17
305
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
60696
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Notices
TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED AVERAGES: RESPONDENTS, RESPONSES AND HOURS—Continued
Type of respondent
Number of
respondents
Instrument
Responses
per
respondent
Total number
of responses
Burden per
response
(hours)
Annual burden
(hours)
CAMPUS INSTRUMENTS
Project Evaluator .................
Project Evaluator .................
Project Evaluator .................
Student ................................
Student ................................
PSI ......................................
TASP ..................................
SBHF ..................................
TUP–S Campus Version ....
SMSS .................................
56
56
56
167
734
4
4
1
1
1
224
224
56
167
734
0.750
0.250
0.667
0.167
0.083
Total .............................
12,050 ................................
........................
12,902
........................
168
56
37
28
61
4,129
* Rounded to the nearest whole number.
Send comments to Summer King,
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
Room 2–1057, One Choke Cherry Road,
Rockville, MD 20857 OR email her a
copy at summer.king@samhsa.hhs.gov.
Written comments should be received
by December 7, 2015.
Summer King,
Statistician.
[FR Doc. 2015–25472 Filed 10–6–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
[Docket No. ]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for Review;
Information Collection Request for the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS), Science and Technology,
Project 25 Compliance Assessment
Program (P25 CAP)
Science and Technology
Directorate, DHS.
ACTION: 60-day notice and request for
comment.
AGENCY:
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) invites the general
public to comment on the renewal of
existing data collection forms for the
DHS Science and Technology
Directorate’s Project 25 (P25)
Compliance Assessment Program (CAP):
Supplier’s Declaration of Compliance
(SDoC) (DHS Form 10044 (6/08)) and
Summary Test Report (DHS Form 10056
(9/08)). The attacks of September 11,
2001, and the destruction of Hurricane
Katrina made apparent the need for
emergency response radio systems that
can interoperate, regardless of which
organization manufactured the
equipment. In response, and per
congressional direction, DHS and the
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) developed the P25
CAP to improve the emergency response
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Oct 06, 2015
Jkt 238001
community’s confidence in purchasing
land mobile radio (LMR) equipment
built to P25 LMR standards. The P25
CAP establishes a process for ensuring
that equipment complies with P25
standards and is capable of
interoperating across manufacturers.
The Department of Homeland Security
needs to be able to collect essential
information from manufacturers on their
products that have met P25 standards as
demonstrated through the P25 CAP.
Equipment suppliers will provide
information to publicly attest to their
products’ compliance with a specific set
of P25 standards. Accompanied by a
Summary Test Report that substantiates
this declaration, the SDoC constitutes a
company’s formal, public attestation of
compliance with the standards for the
equipment. In providing this
information, companies will consent to
making this information public. In turn,
the emergency response community will
use this information to identify P25compliant communications systems.
The P25 CAP Program Manager will
perform a simple administrative review
to ensure the documentation is
complete and accurate in accordance
with the current P25 CAP processes.
This notice and request for comments is
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
will be accepted until December 7,
2015.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments, identified
by docket number, by one of the
following methods:
• Email: John.Merrill@hq.dhs.gov.
Please include docket number DHS- in
the subject line of the message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Merrill (202) 254–5604 (Not a toll free
number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SDoC
and Summary Test Report forms will be
posted on the FirstResponder.gov Web
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
site at https://www.firstresponder.gov.
The forms will be available in Adobe
PDF format. The supplier will complete
the forms electronically. The completed
forms may then be submitted via
Internet to the FirstResponder.gov Web
site.
The Department is committed to
improving its information collection
and urges all interested parties to
suggest how these materials can further
reduce burden while seeking necessary
information under the Act.
DHS is particularly interested in
comments that:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Suggest ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(4) Suggest ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submissions of responses.
Overview of This Information
Collection
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Renewal of information collection.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection:
Science and Technology, Project 25
(P25) Compliance Assessment Program
(CAP).
(3) Agency Form Number, if any, and
the applicable component of the
Department of Homeland Security
sponsoring the collection: Department of
Homeland Security, Science &
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60694-60696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25472]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 concerning opportunity for public comment on proposed
collections of information, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish periodic summaries of
proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects
or to obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology.
Proposed Project: National Outcomes Evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith
Suicide Prevention Program--Revision
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) is requesting
clearance for the revision of data collection associated with the
previously-approved cross-site evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith
(GLS) Youth Suicide Prevention and Early Intervention Program (GLS
Suicide Prevention Program), now entitled National Outcomes Evaluation
(NOE). The NOE is a proposed redesign of the currently-approved cross-
site evaluation (OMB No. 0930-0286; Expiration, January 2017) that
builds on prior published GLS evaluation proximal and distal training
and aggregate findings from program activities (e.g., Condron et al.,
2014; Walrath et al., 2015). As a result of the vast body of
information collected and analyzed through the cross-site evaluation of
the two GLS Suicide Prevention Programs components--the GLS State/
Tribal Program and the GLS Campus Program--SAMHSA has identified areas
for additional investigation and the types of inquiry needed to move
the evaluation into its next phase.
The NOE aims to address the field's need for additional evidence on
the impacts of the GLS Suicide Prevention Program in three areas: (1)
Suicide prevention training effectiveness, (2) early identification and
referral on subsequent care follow-up and adherence, and (3) suicide
safer care practices within health care settings. The evaluation
comprises three distinct, but interconnected core studies--Training,
Continuity of Care (COC), and Suicide Safer Environment (SSE). The
Training and SSE studies also have ``enhanced'' study components. Core
study data align with required program activities across the State/
Tribal and Campus programs and provide continuity with and utility of
data previously collected (implementation and proximal outcomes).
Enhanced components use experimental and quasi-experimental methods
(randomized controlled trial [RCT] and retrospective cohort study
designs) to truly assess program impacts on distal outcomes (e.g.,
identifications and referrals, hospitalizations, and suicide attempts
and deaths) without undue burden on grantees and youth. This outcome-
and impact-focused design reflects SAMHSA's desire to assess the
implementation, outcomes, and impacts of the GLS program.
The NOE builds on information collected through the four-stage
cross-site evaluation approach (context, product, process, and impact)
to further the field of suicide prevention and mental health promotion.
Of notable importance, the design now accounts for differences in
State/Tribal and Campus program grant funding cycles (i.e., 5-year
State/Tribal and 3-year Campus programs), while also establishing
continuity with and maximizing utility of data previously collected.
Further, the evaluation meets the legislative requirements outlined in
the GLSMA to inform performance and implementation of programs.
Eleven data collection activities compose the NOE--two new
instruments, three previously-approved instruments, and six previously-
approved and improved instruments. As GLS program foci differ by
grantee type, some instruments will apply to either State/Tribal or
Campus programs only. Of the 11 instruments, 2 will be administered
with State/Tribal and Campus grantees (tailored to grantee type), 6 are
specific to State/Tribal grantees, and 3 pertain only to Campus
grantees.
Instrument Removals
Due to the fulfillment of data collection goals, six currently-
approved instruments and their associated burden will be removed. The
combined estimated annual burden for these instruments is 4,300 hours.
These include the State/Tribal Training Utilization and Preservation
Survey.
(TUP-S) Adolescent Version, Coalition Profile, and Coalition Survey,
and the Campus Training Exit Survey (TES) Interview Forms, Life Skills
Activities Follow-up Interview, and the Student Awareness Intercept
Survey
Instrument Continuations
Three instruments will be administered only in OMB Year 1 to
finalize data collection for the current cross-site evaluation
protocol. Each instrument was previously approved as part of the four-
stage approach (OMB No. 0930-0286; Expiration, January 2017) and no
changes are being made. These include the State/Tribal Referral Network
Survey (RNS), TUP-S Campus Version, and Campus Short Message Service
Survey (SMSS). Each instrument will be discontinued once the associated
data collection requirement has been fulfilled.
Instrument Revisions
Six currently-approved instruments will be revised for the NOE.
Each of the instruments, or an iteration thereof, has received approval
through multiple cross-site evaluation packages cleared by OMB. As
such, the information gathered has been, and will continue to be,
crucial to this effort and to the field of suicide prevention and
mental health promotion.
[ssquf] Prevention Strategies Inventory (PSI): The PSI has been
updated to enhance the utility and accuracy of the data collected.
Changes capture different strategies implemented and products
distributed by grantee programs, the population of focus for each
strategy, total GLS budget expenditures, and the percent of funds
allocated by the activity type.
[ssquf] Training Activity Summary Page (TASP): New items on the
TASP gather information about the use of behavioral rehearsal and/or
role-play and resources
[[Page 60695]]
provided at trainings--practices that have been found to improve
retention of knowledge and skills posttraining. In addition,
understanding how skills can be maintained over time with materials
provided at trainings (e.g., video reminders, wallet cards, online and
phone applications) is an area suggested for further study (Cross et
al., 2011).
[ssquf] Training Utilization and Preservation Survey (TUP-S) 3 and
6-month follow up: The TUP-S has been improved to examine posttraining
behaviors and utilization of skills by training participants--factors
known to improve understanding of the comprehensive training process
and the impact of training on identifications, referrals, and service
use. The survey now requests information about training resources
received, practice components, trainee participation in role play, and
previous suicide prevention trainings attended; experience intervening
with a suicidal individual (from QPR evaluation tool), intended use of
the training, and referral behaviors; and previous contact and quality
of relationships with youth. Broad items about training others, the
use/intended use of skills, and barriers/facilitators have been
removed. The consent-to-contact form has been modified to add brief
items about the trainee and previous identifications/referrals. The
TUP-S will be administered at 3 and 6 months post-training to a random
sample of training participants via CATI (2000 ST TUP-S 3-mo/600 ST
TUP-S 6-mo per year).
[ssquf] Early Intervention, Referral, and Follow-up Individual Form
(EIRF-I): The EIRF-I has been improved to gather initial follow-up
information about youth identified as being at risk as a result of the
State/Tribal GLS program (whether or not a service was received after
referral). In addition, EIRF-I (1) data elements have been expanded to
include screening practices, screening tools, and screening results of
youth identified as at-risk for suicide; (2) response options have been
expanded/refined (i.e., setting/source of identification, mental health
and non-mental health referral locations, and services received); (3)
tribal-specific data elements have been added; and (4) sources of
information used has been removed.
[ssquf] EIRF Screening Form (EIRF-S): Data elements have been added
to indicate whether State/Tribal screenings were performed at the
individual- or group-level. New response options have been added under
``screening tool'' and ``false positive'' has been removed.
[ssquf] Student Behavioral Health Form (SBHF): The SBHF (formerly
entitled the MIS) has been expanded and renamed. The Campus form has
been enhanced to include referral and follow-up procedure questions
(rather than simply counts); numbers screened, identified at risk,
receiving suicide-specific services, referred, and receiving follow-up;
and age and gender breakdowns of suicide attempts and deaths. Student
enrollment/retention items have been removed; these will be obtained
through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. The SBHF
will require closer involvement with campus behavioral health/health
providers to gather data on procedural questions and screenings, risk
assessment, services, referrals, and follow-ups.
Instrument Additions
Four instruments will augment the evaluation--two are newly
developed instruments and two represent new versions of existing
instruments.
[ssquf] TUP-S RCT (Baseline and 12-Month versions): The TUP-S RCT
refers to versions administered as part of the Training Study RCT. The
RCT collects TUP-S data at baseline (pre-training) and 3, 6, and 12
months after training. Because the surveys are conducted at different
times, each version refers the participant to a specific time period.
All trainees from States/Tribes participating in the RCT and who
consent to be contacted will be surveyed until the desired sample size
of 1332 respondents is achieved. The consent-to-contact form will
describe the RCT and the 4 assessment periods. The consent-to-contact
form will describe the RCT and the 4 assessment periods.
[ssquf] Behavior Health Provider Survey (BHPS): The BHPS is a new
State/Tribal data collection activity and the first to specifically
target behavioral health providers partnering with GLS grantees. Data
will include information about referrals for at-risk youth, SSE care
practices implemented, and client outcomes (number of suicide attempts
and deaths). A total of 1-10 respondents from each State/Tribal
grantee's partnering behavioral health provider will participate
annually.
The estimated response burden to collect this information
associated with the redesigned National Outcomes Evaluation is as
follows annualized over the requested 3-year clearance period is
presented below:
Total and Annualized Averages: Respondents, Responses and Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden per
Type of respondent Instrument Number of Responses per Total number response Annual burden
respondents respondent of responses (hours) (hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE/TRIBAL INSTRUMENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Evaluator......................... PSI......................... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator......................... TASP........................ 43 4 172 0.250 43
Project Evaluator......................... EIRF-Individual Form........ 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator......................... EIRF Screening Form......... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S Consent to Contact.... 6,000 1 6000 0.167 1000
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S 3 Month Version....... 2,000 1 2000 0.500 1000
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S 6 Month Version....... 600 1 600 0.417 250
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT BL Version........ 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 3 Month Version... 444 1 444 0.500 222
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 6 Month Version... 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 12 Month Version.. 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Stakeholder...................... RNS......................... 26 1 26 0.667 17
Behavioral Health Provider................ BHPS........................ 407 1 407 0.750 305
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 60696]]
CAMPUS INSTRUMENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Evaluator......................... PSI......................... 56 4 224 0.750 168
Project Evaluator......................... TASP........................ 56 4 224 0.250 56
Project Evaluator......................... SBHF........................ 56 1 56 0.667 37
Student................................... TUP-S Campus Version........ 167 1 167 0.167 28
Student................................... SMSS........................ 734 1 734 0.083 61
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 12,050...................... .............. 12,902 .............. 4,129
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rounded to the nearest whole number.
Send comments to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
Room 2-1057, One Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857 OR email her a
copy at summer.king@samhsa.hhs.gov. Written comments should be received
by December 7, 2015.
Summer King,
Statistician.
[FR Doc. 2015-25472 Filed 10-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
