Notice of Issuance of Final Policy Directive, 6686-6691 [05-2325]
Download as PDF
6686
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
the appropriate and only qualified
organization to address the activities
described under this program
announcement.
ATPM is the only association that has
an established membership of diverse
professionals that includes teachers,
practitioners, administrators, and
residents in the specialty of preventive
medicine, and graduate students from
schools of medicine and public health,
as well as from public health agencies.
For 62 years, ATPM and its members
have been in the forefront of advancing,
promoting, and supporting health
promotion and disease prevention in the
education of physicians and other
health professionals. ATPM provides an
essential connection to individuals and
institutions devoted to health promotion
and disease prevention education.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
C. Funding
Name: Community and Tribal
Subcommittee (CTS).
Time and Date: 3 p.m.–4:30 p.m., February
28, 2005.
Place: The teleconference will originate at
the National Center for Environmental
Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry in Atlanta, Georgia. Please
see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for details
on accessing the teleconference.
Status: Open to the public, teleconference
access limited only by availability of
telephone ports.
Purpose: Under the charge of the Board of
Scientific Counselors, NCEH/ATSDR the
Community and Tribal Subcommittee will
provide the BSC, NCEH/ATSDR with a forum
for community and tribal first-hand
perspectives on the interactions and impacts
of the NCEH/ATSDR’s national and regional
policies, practices and programs.
Matters to be Discussed: The
teleconference agenda will include
discussions on obtaining directions from the
BSC on their expectations from the CTS; the
community tool kit; faith-based initiative/
emergency preparedness; partnering with the
Program Review Committee; and an open
discussion for other important issues.
Agenda items are subject to change as
priorities dictate.
Supplementary Information: This
conference call is scheduled to begin at 3
p.m. eastern standard time. To participate in
the teleconference, please dial (877) 315–
6535 and enter conference code 383520.
For Further Information Contact: Sandra
Malcom, Committee Management Specialist,
Office of Science, NCEH/ATSDR, M/S E–28,
1600 Clifton Road, NE., Atlanta, Georgia
30333, telephone 404/498–0003.
The Director, Management Analysis and
Services Office, has been delegated the
authority to sign Federal Register notices
pertaining to announcements of meetings and
other committee management activities for
both CDC and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry.
Approximately $15,000,000 is
available in FY 2005 to fund this award.
It is expected that the award will begin
on or before September 1, 2005 and will
be made for a 12-month budget period
within a project period of up to 5 years.
Funding estimates may change.
D. Where To Obtain Additional
Information
For general comments or questions
about this announcement, contact:
Technical Information Management,
CDC Procurement and Grants Office,
2920 Brandywine Road, Atlanta, GA
30341–4146, telephone: 770–488–2700.
For technical questions about this
program, contact: John (Jack) Rogers,
Technical Review Administrator, The
Coordinating Center for Health
Information and Services (CoCHIS),
4770 Buford Hwy, Mailstop K–38,
Atlanta, GA 30341, telephone: 770–488–
2516, e-mail: JJRogers@cdc.gov.
Dated: February 2, 2005.
William P. Nichols,
Director, Procurement and Grants Office,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05–2372 Filed 2–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
National Center for Environmental
Health/Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry; The Community
and Tribal Subcommittee of the Board
of Scientific Counselors (BSC),
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), National Center for
Environmental Health (NCEH)/Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR): Teleconference
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, NCEH/ATSDR
announces the following subcommittee
meeting:
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: February 1, 2005.
Alvin Hall,
Director, Management Analysis and Services
Office, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 05–2376 Filed 2–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–70–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Notice of Issuance of Final Policy
Directive
Administration for Native
Americans (ANA), HHS.
SUMMARY: The Administration for
Native Americans (ANA) herein
describes its issuance of final
interpretive rules, general statements of
policy and rules of agency procedure or
practice relating to the Social and
Economic Development Strategies
(SEDS), Language Preservation and
Maintenance (hereinafter referred to as
Native Language), and Environmental
Regulatory Enhancement (hereinafter
referred to as Environmental) programs.
DATES: January 28, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sheila Cooper, Director of Program
Operations at (877) 922–9262.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
Pursuant to section 814 of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b–1, ANA is
required to provide members of the
public an opportunity to comment on
proposed changes in interpretive rules,
statements of general policy, and rules
of agency procedure or practice, and to
give notice of the final adoption of such
changes at least 30 days before the
changes become effective.
The Administration for Native
Americans (ANA) published a Notice of
Public Comment (NOPC) in the Federal
Register on December 27, 2004 (69 FR
77251), on the proposed ANA policy
and program clarifications,
modifications, and activities for the FY
2005 Program Announcements. The
NOPC closed January 25, 2005. ANA
received two public comments: One
submitted by an inter-tribal non-profit
organization and one from a federallyrecognized tribe. The comments in
response to the notice have been
considered and one has been accepted.
The clarification will appear in the FY
2005 SEDS, Native Language and
Environmental program
announcements. This notice shall
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
suffice as the response to comments and
any public recommendations accepted
by ANA will be reflected in the FY 05
program announcements to be
published in the Federal Register.
Comment and Response
I. ANA Application Format
ANA has revised Part Two,
‘‘Application Review Criteria’’ of the FY
2005 Program Announcement,
specifically the Application Submission
Requirements. Previously, ANA
required applicants to include and
count the Objective Work Plan (OWP)
form (OMB Control Number 0980–
0204), and the Federal and non-Federal
share line-item budget and budget
justification narrative in the page
limitation. In FY 2005, ANA has
removed the OWP and the line-item
budget and budget justification narrative
from the page limitation. With the
exemption of the OWP and the budget
section from the page limitation, ANA
has reduced in the FY 2005 program
announcements the Application
Submission Requirements to 40 pages.
The exemption of the OWP and the
budget from the page limitation will
enable applicants applying for multiyear awards to provide more
information on the proposed project.
(Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d)
and 803C of the Narrative American
Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b–3.)
II. Required Forms
The Grant Application Data Summary
(GADS) form (OMB Clearance Number
0970 0261 exp. 03/31/2007) is a new
ANA form. The Commissioner for the
Administration for Native Americans is
required to collect and disseminate
information related to the social and
economic conditions of Native
Americans for inclusion in its Annual
Report to Congress. The data collected
on the GADS is required to assist in
gathering that data. The information is
also used to ensure that ANA obtains
the proper number of reviewers to
review each category of grant
applications. Although not included in
prior announcements, GADS received
OMB approval after the publication of
the FY 2004 announcement. It will be
included in this announcement and
future announcements to be submitted
as a part of the application package.
(Legal authority: Section 803B of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991B–2.)
III. Evaluation Criteria
(a) ANA has modified five evaluation
criteria titles and adjusted the point
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
values and weight of three criteria. In
ANA’s FY 2004 grant competitions,
ANA did not rate applications on how
closely they followed the prescribed
format. This year, ANA is proposing to
revise the Evaluation Criteria to provide
for the award of points in rating
applications based on whether the
applicant complied with the
requirements in the announcement with
regard to the organization of the
application. ANA will maintain six
evaluation criteria. The title and merit
weights will apply to all three ANA
program areas. Criterion One was
retitled from ‘‘Project Introduction and
Summary/Abstract’’ to ‘‘Introduction
and Project Summary/Application
Format’’ and modified to add points for
the Application Format to clarify the
importance of adhering to the
application requirements. Criterion Two
was retitled from ‘‘Objectives and Need
for Assistance’’ to ‘‘Need for
Assistance’’. Criterion Three was
retitled for clarity from ‘‘Approach’’ to
‘‘Project Approach’’. Criterion Four was
retitled from ‘‘Organizational Profiles’’
to ‘‘Organizational Capacity’’ and the
point value was reduced to allow for the
increase in weight and points awarded
under Criterion One. Criterion Five was
retitled for clarity from ‘‘Results or
Benefits Expected’’ to ‘‘Project Impact/
Evaluation’’ and the point value was
reduced to allow for the increase in
weight and points awarded under
Criterion Six. For FY 2005 program
announcements the titles and assigned
point criteria values are: Criterion
One—Introduction and Project
Summary/Application Format (10 pts.);
Criterion Two—Needed for Assistance
(20 pts.); Criterion Three—Project
Approach (25 pts.); Criterion Four—
Organizational Capacity (15 pts.);
Criterion Five—Project Impact/
Evaluation (15 pts.); Criterion Six—
Budget and Budget Justification/Cost
Effectiveness (15 pts.). (Legal authority:
Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991b–3.)
(b) In the FY 2004 Program
Announcement within the ANA
Criterion Five, ANA used the term
‘‘Performance’’ Indicator. In the FY 2005
Program Announcement this term will
be changed to ‘‘Impact’’ Indicator to be
consistent with the Native American
Programs Act of 1974, as amended.
(Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d)
and 803C of the Native American
Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b–3.)
(c) Standard and Required Impact
Indicators: As ANA continues to
improve its competitive grant program
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6687
ANA has modified (through addition or
deletion) its collection of impact
indicators under each of its programs
(SEDS, Native Language and
Environmental). The modified impact
indicators will continue to be used to
inform Congress and the public on the
effectiveness, success and impact that
ANA programs have in Native American
communities and on behalf of Native
American families. Two impact
indicators will be required across all
three program areas to serve as a
common baseline of data that is
required to be reported in ANA’s
legislation to demonstrate the diversity
of projects and to monitor the impact of
projects on the community. The FY
2005 program announcements still
require five impact indicators to be
submitted by the applicant under
Criterion Five. ANA has standardized
for consistency and program
performance data collection two of the
required impact indicators across all
three program areas (SEDS, Native
Language and Environmental). The two
standard required impact indicators are:
(1) Number of partnerships formed and
(2) the amount of dollars leveraged
beyond the required NFS match. In
addition to the two standard required
impact indicators, an applicant must
also submit three additional indicators
either selected from a suggested list in
each program announcement or
applicant project-specific impact
indicators. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b–2
and 2991b–3.)
Discussion on Comment: A comment
was received that expressed concern
about how ANA’s peer reviewers would
interpret ANA’s standard impact
indicator (2) ‘‘amount of dollars
leveraged beyond the required nonfederal share match’’. The commenter is
concerned that peer reviewers will
negatively perceive any leveraged
resources identified by the applicant in
the request for federal funds as an
indication that the ANA project funds
are not needed by the applicant. The
commenter requested that ANA add a
disclaimer to the program
announcements indicating that
information pertaining to leveraged
resources will not be a negative factor in
the review process.
Response: ANA annually trains peer
reviewers and provides specific
guidance on how to analyze proposed
projects and the application scoring
process as it relates to the evaluation
criteria. ANA selected the ‘‘leveraged
resource’’ indicator as a standard for all
three ANA program areas because it will
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
6688
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
yield useful information to support an
analysis of how ANA’s limited funding
impacts native communities. The
applicant’s response to this indicator
will also demonstrate how the leveraged
resources contribute to the impact an
ANA funded project has in a
community. The ANA definition for
‘‘leveraged resources’’ is the total dollar
value of all non-ANA resources that are
committed to a proposed ANA project
and are supported by documentation
that exceed the 20% non-Federal match
required for an ANA grant. Such
resources may include any natural,
financial and physical resources
available within the tribe, organization,
or community to assist in the successful
completion of the project. An example
would be a letter from an organization
that agrees to provide a supportive
action, product, and service, human or
financial contribution that will add to
the potential success of the project.
ANA has considered the comment to
add a disclaimer to the program
announcements and has determined
that ANA guidance and peer review
procedures are sufficient to ensure a fair
and reasonable review is conducted on
all applications requesting federal
funds. The required ANA impact
indicator will remain as a standard data
element to be used for ANA program
data collection purposes.
The optional impact indicators for
SEDS are: (1) Number of infrastructures
and administrative systems, including
policies and procedures developed and
implemented; (2) number of codes or
ordinances developed and
implemented; (3) number of people to
successfully complete a workshop/
training; (4) number of children, youth,
families or elders assisted or
participating; (5) number of volunteer
hours; (6) number of faith-based or
community-based partnerships; (7)
number of jobs created; (8) number of
community-based small businesses
established or expanded; (9)
identification of Tribal or Village
government business, industry, energy
or financial codes or ordinances that
were adopted or enacted; and (10)
number of micro-businesses started. The
optional impact indicators for Language,
Category I are: (1) Number of surveys
completed; (2) percent and number of
community members assessed; (3) the
rate of language loss or gain; (4) number
of elders consulted; (5) number of
language experts consulted; (6) number
of community goals developed to
preserve the native language; and (7)
number of infrastructure and
administrative systems, including
policies and procedures developed and
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
implemented. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b–2
and 2991b–3.)
The optional impact indicators for
Language, Category II are: (1) Number of
people involved in establishment or
operation of project; (2) number of
training classes or workshops held to
teach language; (3) number and type of
materials developed; (4) number of
media products developed; (5) number
of translations achieved; (6) number of
individuals who increased in ability to
speak the language; (7) number of
participants who achieve fluency; (8)
number of settings the language is
spoken in; and (9) number of
infrastructure and administrative
systems, including policies and
procedures developed and
implemented. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b–2
and 2991b–3.)
The optional impact indicators for
Environmental are: (1) Number of
environmental regulations, codes or
ordinances created; (2) number of
people to successfully complete a
workshop/training; (3) number of
workshops/trainings provided; (4) types
of capacity building systems created and
implemented to support environmental
program functions; (5) identification of
Tribal or Village government
regulations, codes or ordinances that
were enacted and adopted; (6) number
of regulations, codes or ordinances
successfully enforced; and (7) number of
infrastructure and administrative
systems, including policies and
procedures developed and
implemented. ANA may add/delete
optional impact indicators to program
announcements as necessary to support
ANA initiatives. (Legal authority:
Section 803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C
of the Native American Programs Act of
1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b,
2991b–2, and 2991b–3.)
Discussion on Comment: One
comment was received that pertained to
this section. The commenter suggested
that ANA clarify in the evaluation
criteria section the request to submit
five impact indicators. The commenter
offered text to clearly define the
applicant’s option to select three
indicators from the suggested program
announcement list or to submit
applicant defined project indicators or
to submit a combination of ANA
suggested indicators and applicant
defined indicators.
Response: ANA has reviewed the
comment and concurs there is a need to
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
clearly describe the optional impact
indicators. ANA will incorporate the
following text in the three FY 2005 ANA
program announcements. The following
paragraph will precede the discussion
on impact indicators:
In addition to the two standard
required impact indicators, an applicant
must also submit three additional
impact indicators. These three impact
indicators may be selected from the
suggested list given below, or they may
be developed for the specific proposed
project, or the applicant may submit a
combination of both the ANA suggested
indicators and applicant project-specific
indicators. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b–2
and 2991b–3.)
(d) ANA corrected the timeframe for
use of research data in an application
from 48 to 36 months under the
Language, Category II program.
IV. ANA Funding Restrictions
In ANA’s effort to streamline its
program announcements and to clarify
Funding Restriction Policies for
applicants, ANA has relocated general
policy statements from the criterion
section of the program announcement
text to the Funding Restrictions Policies
section. Formerly listed under ‘‘ANA
Administrative Policies’’, the bullet
point on funding requests for feasibility
studies, business plans, marketing plans
or written materials and the bullet point
on proposals from consortia of Tribes
were moved to the section entitled
‘‘ANA Funding Restrictions’’. These
restrictions are already reflected in the
ANA eligibility restrictions at 45 CFR
1336.33(b)(2) and (b)(6). The bullet
point on the social service delivery
programs was inadvertently omitted
from previous announcements, but ANA
is statutorily required to address these
programs. The restriction already
appears in the ANA eligibility
regulation at 45 CFR 1336.33(b)(3). ANA
will include the following funding
restrictions in all program
announcements in compliance with
sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991b–3 and 45 CFR 1336:
• Projects that request funds for
feasibility studies, business plans,
marketing plans or written materials,
such as manuals, that are not an
essential part of the applicant’s project
or SEDS long-rage development plan.
(Legal authority: Sections 803(a) and (d)
and 803C of the Native American
Programs Act of 1974 as amended, 42
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b–3 and 45 CFR
1336.33.)
• The support of ongoing social
service delivery programs or the
expansion, or continuation, of existing
social service delivery programs. (Legal
authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974 as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b–3 and 45 CFR
1336.33.)
• Proposals from consortia of Tribes
that are not specific to support from and
roles of member Tribes. An application
from a consortium must have goals and
objectives that will create positive
impacts and outcomes in the
communities of its members. ANA will
not fund activities by a consortium of
Tribes that duplicates activities for
which member Tribes also receive
funding from ANA. (Legal authority:
Sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991b–3 and 45 CFR 1336.33.)
V. Initial Screening
Prior to competitive panel review, all
applications are pre-screened for
completeness. Previously, each
application submitted to ANA in
response to a program announcement
was pre-screened to ensure that (a) the
application was received by the program
announcement closing date; (b) the
application was submitted in
accordance with Section IV,
‘‘Application and Submission
Information’’; (c) the applicant is
eligible for funding in accordance with
Section III, ‘‘Eligibility Information’’; (d)
the applicant submitted the proper
supporting documentation such as proof
of non-profit status, resolutions, and
required government forms; (e) an
authorized representative has signed the
application; and (f) the applicant has a
DUNS number. An application that does
not meet (a) through (f) immediately
above is determined to be incomplete
and is excluded from the competitive
review process.
In an effort to ensure consistency with
the way ACF evaluates competitive
discretionary grant applications, ACF
has changed its policy to include only
two enforceable screen-out criteria:
Timeliness and compliance with stated
funding limitations. Additionally, ACF
has approved ANA’s request to include
two additional screen-out criteria:
Inclusion of a signed and dated
resolution by the governing body and,
for applicants that are not Tribes or
Alaska Native Village governments,
submission of a resolution and proof
that a majority of the governing board of
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
directors is representative of the
community to be served.
Consequently, ANA will screen
applications for completeness prior to
the competitive panel review using the
following elements: (a) The application
is received by ANA on or before the
published program announcement
closing date; (b) the federal request does
not exceed the ceiling award amount as
published in the program
announcement; (c) the application
includes a signed and dated resolution
of the governing body; and (d) if the
applicant is not a Tribe or Alaska Native
Village government, the native nonprofit organization submits a resolution
and proof that a majority of the
governing board of directors is
representative of the community to be
served. An application that does not
contain these elements will be
considered incomplete and excluded
from the competitive review process.
VI. Administrative Policies
In ANA’s effort to streamline its
program announcements and to clarify
administrative policies for applicants,
ANA has relocated general policy
statements from the Criterion section of
the program announcement text to the
Administrative Policies section. ANA
has also clarified administrative policies
that have historically prompted
numerous questions and created
application and project development
inconsistencies. For example, ANA
removed ‘‘Organizational Capacity’’ and
reworded the first bullet below for
clarity. The second bullet below
clarifies the administrative policy on the
funding of projects versus programs to
include the term ‘‘short-term’’ to
communicate that projects will not be
awarded for longer than three years in
most program areas. The third and
fourth bullets were moved from
Definitions to Administrative Policies to
establish the policy to determine project
progress before additional funding is
committed. For the purposes of clarify,
the fifth bullet combined and reworded
the requirement for community
involvement under the definition for
‘‘Community Involvement’’ with a
similar paragraph under ‘‘Need for
Assistance’’. The sixth bullet supports
the needs of ANA and was reworded for
clarity. The seventh bullet was also
reworded for clarity. The policy on the
treatment of multiple applications and
applications from Tribal components
has been reworded for clarity and
broken into two separate points to
ensure application to both Tribes and
non-profit organizations. The revised
policy is contained in the eighth and
ninth bullet points on the list below.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6689
The ninth bullet corrects the inadvertent
omission of the categories that apply to
the board of directors for non-profit
applicants. ANA will now include the
following administrative policies in
each program announcement (legal
authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended, and 45 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b–3):
Applicants must comply with the
following administrative policies:
• All funded applications will be
reviewed to ensure that the applicant
has provided a positive statement to
give credit to ANA on all material
developed using ANA funds.
• ANA funds short-term projects, not
programs. Proposed projects must have
definitive goals and objectives that will
be achieved by the end of the project
period. All projects funded by ANA
must be completed, or self-sustaining or
supported by other-than-ANA funding
at the end of the project period.
• Before funding the second or third
year of a multi-year grant, ANA will
require verification and support
documentation from the grantee that
objectives and outcomes proposed in
the preceding year were accomplished
and that the non-federal share was met.
• ANA reviews the quarterly and
annual reports of grantees to determine
if the grantee is meeting its goals,
objectives and activities identified in
the Objective Work Plan (OWP).
• Applications from national and
regional organizations must clearly
demonstrate a need for the project,
explain how the project originated,
discuss the community-based delivery
strategy of the project, identify and
describe the intended beneficiaries,
describe and relate the actual project
benefits to the community and
organization and describe a communitybased delivery system. National and
regional organizations must describe
their membership, define how the
organization operates and demonstrate
Native community and/or Tribal
government support for the project. The
type of community to be served will
determine the type of documentation
necessary to support the project.
• Applicants proposing an Economic
Development project must address the
project’s viability. A business plan, if
applicable, must be included to describe
the projects feasibility, cash flow and
approach for the implementation and
marketing of the business.
• ANA will review proposed projects
to ensure applicants have considered all
resources available to the community to
support the project.
• ANA will not accept applications
from Tribal components that are
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
6690
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
Tribally authorized divisions unless the
ANA application includes a Tribal
resolution.
• ANA will only accept one
application per eligible entity. The first
application received by ANA will be the
application considered for competition
unless ANA is notified in writing which
application should be considered for
competitive review.
• If the applicant, other than a Tribe
or an Alaska Native Village government,
is proposing a project benefiting Native
Americans, Alaska Natives, or both, the
applicant must provide assurance that
its duly elected or appointed board of
directors is representative of the
community to be served. Applicants
must provide information that at least a
majority of the individuals serving on a
non-profit applicant’s board fall into
one or more of the following categories:
(1) A current or past member of the
community to be served; (2) a
prospective participant or beneficiary of
the project to be funded; or (3) have a
cultural relationship with the
community to be served. (Legal
authority: 45 CFR 1336.33 (a).)
VII. Funding Thresholds
This is a clarification to the ANA
Environmental Regulatory Enhancement
program announcement funding
threshold. The funding threshold for the
Environmental Regulatory Enhancement
program will be $50,000.00 (floor
amount) to $250,000.00 (ceiling amount)
per budget period. Applications
exceeding the $250,000.00 threshold
will be considered non-responsive and
will not be considered for funding
under this announcement. (Legal
authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b–3.)
VIII. Definitions
The following definitions will be used
in the appropriate program-specific FY
2005 program announcements. ANA has
clarified many areas that applicants
have historically found difficult to
understand and that have previously
prompted numerous questions and
created application and project
development inconsistencies. The ANA
program announcements will now
include additional definitions for the
following terms:
Consortium/Tribal Village: A group of
Tribes or Villages that join together for
long-term purposes or for the purpose of
an ANA grant.
Impact Indicators: Measurement
descriptions used to identify the
outcomes or results of the project.
Outcomes or results must be
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
quantifiable, measurable, verifiable and
related to the outcome of the project to
determine that the project has achieved
its desired objective and can be
independently verified through ANA
monitoring and evaluation.
Objective Work Plan (OWP): The
project plan the applicant will use in
meeting the results and benefits
expected for the project. The results and
benefits are directly related to the
Impact Indicators. The OWP provides
detailed descriptions of how, when,
where, by whom and why activities are
proposed for the project and is
complemented and condensed in the
OWP. ANA will require separate OWPs
for each year of the project. (Form
OMB# 0980–0204 exp 10/31/2006.)
Minor Renovation or Alteration: Work
required to change the interior
arrangements or other physical
characteristics of an existing facility, or
install equipment so that it may be more
effectively used for the project. Minor
alteration and renovation may include
work referred to as improvements,
conversion, rehabilitation, remodeling
or modernization, but is distinguished
from construction and major
renovations. A minor alteration and/or
renovation must be incidental and
essential for the project (‘‘incidental’’
meaning the total alteration and
renovation budget must not exceed the
lesser of $150,000 or 25 percent of total
direct costs approved for the entire
project period).
Total Approved Project Costs: The
sum of the Federal request plus the nonFederal share. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b–
3).
IX. Application Review Information
To ensure that grantees fulfill their
obligations to ANA, ANA is including a
review of grantees’ past performance
when considering the applicant for a
new or ongoing award under all three
program areas. The inclusion of this
item in the application consideration
process will assist ANA in making its
funding decisions on whether or not to
award to a particular grant applicant.
Factors that may impact a grantee’s past
performance are their timeliness to
report submission requirements, timely
use and proper expenditure of the grant
award funds and the administrative ease
of closing out the grantee at the end of
the award period.
The following statement is included
under the Application Consideration for
the Review and Selection Process:
Application Consideration: The
Commissioner’s funding decision is
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
based on an analysis of the application
by the review panel, panel review scores
and recommendations; an analysis by
ANA staff; review of previous ANA
grantee’s past performance; comments
from the State and Federal agencies
having contract and grant performancerelated information; and other interested
parties.
X. Native Language Program Area
The title for Native Language Category
I grants has been changed from ‘‘Native
Language Category I Planning’’ to
‘‘Native Language Category I
Assessment’’. The change clarifies the
purpose of the 12-month Category I
grant. (Legal authority: Section 803(a)
and (d) and 803C of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b–
3.)
The FY 2005 Native Language
Program Announcement expands the
Category I-Program Area of Interest and
the necessary assessment data to be
collected. ANA recommends each
applicant consider the Program Area of
Interest in the development of a project.
The Program Area of Interest under
Category I is ‘‘A project for data
collection and compilation that surveys
the current language status through a
‘‘formal’’ method (e.g., work performed
by a linguist and/or a language survey
conducted by community members) or
an ‘‘informal’’ method (e.g., a
community consensus of the language
status based on elders, Tribal scholars
and/or other community members) with
the development of long-range language
preservation goals and uses elders in the
development of these goals. This
assessment data should capture, at a
minimum, the following data: Number
of speakers; age of speakers; gender of
speakers; level(s) of fluency; number of
first language speakers (native language
as the first language acquired); number
of second language speakers (native
language as the second language
acquired); where native language is used
(e.g., home, court system, religious
ceremonies, church, media, school
governance or cultural activities); source
of data (formal and/or informal); and
rate of language loss or gain. (Legal
authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b–3.)
Additional Information
Technical Correction: Upon general
review of the Notice, Section V:
Screening Elements, item ‘‘d’’ will be rewritten as ‘‘Each application submitted
under an ANA program announcement
will undergo a pre-review screening for:
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 25 / Tuesday, February 8, 2005 / Notices
* * * (d) if the applicant is not a Tribe
or Alaska Native Village government,
the applicant must submit proof that a
majority of the governing board of
directors is representative of the
community to be served.’’ The reference
to Native non-profit organizations was
inadvertently placed in the text. This
correction will be reflected in all three
FY 05 ANA program announcements.
Technical Correction: Upon general
review of the Notice, Section II.
Evaluation Criteria (a) additional text is
needed to clarify the use of the ANA
Project Abstract form in relation to
Criteria One: Introduction and Project
Summary/Application Format.
Instructional text will be inserted in the
ANA evaluation Criterion One to state
‘‘In addition to using the ANA Project
Abstract form, applicants will submit a
brief narrative summary of the project
that provides more information on the
applicant and proposed project.’’ The
additional text will provide clarity to
the applicant as they respond to the
program announcement.
Dated: January 31, 2005.
Quanah Crossland Stamps,
Commissioner, Administration for Native
Americans.
[FR Doc. 05–2325 Filed 2–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–M
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 2005N–0016]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Evaluation of
Consumer-Friendly Formats for Brief
Summary in Direct-to-Consumer Print
Advertisements for Prescription
Drugs: Study 1
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on a
proposed collection of certain
information by the agency. Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the
PRA), Federal agencies are required to
publish notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of
information and to allow 60 days for
public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on
a study of consumer evaluations of
various consumer-friendly formats for
the brief summary in direct-to-consumer
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:12 Feb 07, 2005
Jkt 205001
(DTC) prescription drug print
advertisements.
Submit written or electronic
comments on the collection of
information by April 11, 2005.
DATES:
Submit electric comments
on the collection of information to:
https://www.fda.gov/dockets/ecomments.
Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division
of Dockets Management (HFA–305),
Food and Drug Administration, 5630
Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD
20852. All comments should be
identified with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this
document.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Nelson, Office of Management
Programs (HFA–250), Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–1482.
Under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of
information they conduct or sponsor.
‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined
in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests
or requirements that members of the
public submit reports, keep records, or
provide information to a third party.
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal
agencies to provide a 60-day notice in
the Federal Register concerning each
proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an
existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB
for approval. To comply with this
requirement, FDA is publishing notice
of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
With respect to each of the following
collection of information, FDA invites
comments on these topics: (1) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of FDA’s functions, including whether
the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques,
when appropriate, and other forms of
information technology.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6691
Evaluation of Consumer-Friendly
Formats for Brief Summary in Directto-Consumer (DTC) Print
Advertisements for Prescription Drugs:
Study 1
Section 1701(a)(4) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300u(a)(4)) authorizes FDA to conduct
research relating to health information.
Section 903(b)(2)(c) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21
U.S.C. 393(b)(2)(c)) authorizes FDA to
conduct research relating to drugs and
other FDA regulated products in
carrying out the provisions of the act.
Under the act, a drug is misbranded if
its labeling or advertising is false or
misleading. In addition, section 502(n)
of the act (21 U.S.C. 352(n)) specifies
that advertisements for prescription
drugs and biological products must
provide a true statement of information
‘‘***in brief summary***’’ about the
advertised product’s ‘‘***side effects,
contraindications and
effectiveness***.’’ Generally, the
display text of an advertisement
presents a fair and balanced disclosure
of the product’s indication and benefits
and the product’s side effects and
contraindications. The prescription drug
advertising regulations (§ 202.1(e)(3)(iii)
(21 CFR 202.1(e)(3)(iii))) specify that the
information about risks must include
each specific side effect and
contraindication’’ from the advertised
drug’s approved labeling. The regulation
also specifies that the phrase ‘‘side
effect and contraindication’’ refers to all
of the categories of risk information
required in the approved product
labeling written for health professionals,
including the Warnings, Precautions,
and Adverse Reactions sections. Thus,
every risk in an advertised drug’s
approved labeling must be addressed to
meet these regulations.
In recent years, FDA has become
concerned about the adequacy of the
brief summary in DTC print
advertisements. Although advertising of
prescription drugs was once primarily
addressed to health professionals,
consumers increasingly have become a
primary target audience, and DTC
advertising has dramatically increased
in the past few years. Results of the FDA
2002 survey on DTC advertising
(available at www.fda.gov/cder/ddmac/
researchka.htm) provide some
information regarding the extent to
which consumers read these ads and the
brief summary that accompanies the
main ad—41 percent of respondents in
2002 reported they do not usually read
any of the brief summary. Use of the
brief summary was a function of
whether they have an interest in the
E:\FR\FM\08FEN1.SGM
08FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6686-6691]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2325]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
Notice of Issuance of Final Policy Directive
AGENCY: Administration for Native Americans (ANA), HHS.
SUMMARY: The Administration for Native Americans (ANA) herein describes
its issuance of final interpretive rules, general statements of policy
and rules of agency procedure or practice relating to the Social and
Economic Development Strategies (SEDS), Language Preservation and
Maintenance (hereinafter referred to as Native Language), and
Environmental Regulatory Enhancement (hereinafter referred to as
Environmental) programs.
DATES: January 28, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila Cooper, Director of Program
Operations at (877) 922-9262.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pursuant to section 814 of the Native American Programs Act of
1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b-1, ANA is required to provide members
of the public an opportunity to comment on proposed changes in
interpretive rules, statements of general policy, and rules of agency
procedure or practice, and to give notice of the final adoption of such
changes at least 30 days before the changes become effective.
The Administration for Native Americans (ANA) published a Notice of
Public Comment (NOPC) in the Federal Register on December 27, 2004 (69
FR 77251), on the proposed ANA policy and program clarifications,
modifications, and activities for the FY 2005 Program Announcements.
The NOPC closed January 25, 2005. ANA received two public comments: One
submitted by an inter-tribal non-profit organization and one from a
federally-recognized tribe. The comments in response to the notice have
been considered and one has been accepted. The clarification will
appear in the FY 2005 SEDS, Native Language and Environmental program
announcements. This notice shall
[[Page 6687]]
suffice as the response to comments and any public recommendations
accepted by ANA will be reflected in the FY 05 program announcements to
be published in the Federal Register.
Comment and Response
I. ANA Application Format
ANA has revised Part Two, ``Application Review Criteria'' of the FY
2005 Program Announcement, specifically the Application Submission
Requirements. Previously, ANA required applicants to include and count
the Objective Work Plan (OWP) form (OMB Control Number 0980-0204), and
the Federal and non-Federal share line-item budget and budget
justification narrative in the page limitation. In FY 2005, ANA has
removed the OWP and the line-item budget and budget justification
narrative from the page limitation. With the exemption of the OWP and
the budget section from the page limitation, ANA has reduced in the FY
2005 program announcements the Application Submission Requirements to
40 pages. The exemption of the OWP and the budget from the page
limitation will enable applicants applying for multi-year awards to
provide more information on the proposed project. (Legal authority:
Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Narrative American Programs Act
of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-3.)
II. Required Forms
The Grant Application Data Summary (GADS) form (OMB Clearance
Number 0970 0261 exp. 03/31/2007) is a new ANA form. The Commissioner
for the Administration for Native Americans is required to collect and
disseminate information related to the social and economic conditions
of Native Americans for inclusion in its Annual Report to Congress. The
data collected on the GADS is required to assist in gathering that
data. The information is also used to ensure that ANA obtains the
proper number of reviewers to review each category of grant
applications. Although not included in prior announcements, GADS
received OMB approval after the publication of the FY 2004
announcement. It will be included in this announcement and future
announcements to be submitted as a part of the application package.
(Legal authority: Section 803B of the Native American Programs Act of
1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991B-2.)
III. Evaluation Criteria
(a) ANA has modified five evaluation criteria titles and adjusted
the point values and weight of three criteria. In ANA's FY 2004 grant
competitions, ANA did not rate applications on how closely they
followed the prescribed format. This year, ANA is proposing to revise
the Evaluation Criteria to provide for the award of points in rating
applications based on whether the applicant complied with the
requirements in the announcement with regard to the organization of the
application. ANA will maintain six evaluation criteria. The title and
merit weights will apply to all three ANA program areas. Criterion One
was retitled from ``Project Introduction and Summary/Abstract'' to
``Introduction and Project Summary/Application Format'' and modified to
add points for the Application Format to clarify the importance of
adhering to the application requirements. Criterion Two was retitled
from ``Objectives and Need for Assistance'' to ``Need for Assistance''.
Criterion Three was retitled for clarity from ``Approach'' to ``Project
Approach''. Criterion Four was retitled from ``Organizational
Profiles'' to ``Organizational Capacity'' and the point value was
reduced to allow for the increase in weight and points awarded under
Criterion One. Criterion Five was retitled for clarity from ``Results
or Benefits Expected'' to ``Project Impact/Evaluation'' and the point
value was reduced to allow for the increase in weight and points
awarded under Criterion Six. For FY 2005 program announcements the
titles and assigned point criteria values are: Criterion One--
Introduction and Project Summary/Application Format (10 pts.);
Criterion Two--Needed for Assistance (20 pts.); Criterion Three--
Project Approach (25 pts.); Criterion Four--Organizational Capacity (15
pts.); Criterion Five--Project Impact/Evaluation (15 pts.); Criterion
Six--Budget and Budget Justification/Cost Effectiveness (15 pts.).
(Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-
3.)
(b) In the FY 2004 Program Announcement within the ANA Criterion
Five, ANA used the term ``Performance'' Indicator. In the FY 2005
Program Announcement this term will be changed to ``Impact'' Indicator
to be consistent with the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as
amended. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991b-3.)
(c) Standard and Required Impact Indicators: As ANA continues to
improve its competitive grant program ANA has modified (through
addition or deletion) its collection of impact indicators under each of
its programs (SEDS, Native Language and Environmental). The modified
impact indicators will continue to be used to inform Congress and the
public on the effectiveness, success and impact that ANA programs have
in Native American communities and on behalf of Native American
families. Two impact indicators will be required across all three
program areas to serve as a common baseline of data that is required to
be reported in ANA's legislation to demonstrate the diversity of
projects and to monitor the impact of projects on the community. The FY
2005 program announcements still require five impact indicators to be
submitted by the applicant under Criterion Five. ANA has standardized
for consistency and program performance data collection two of the
required impact indicators across all three program areas (SEDS, Native
Language and Environmental). The two standard required impact
indicators are: (1) Number of partnerships formed and (2) the amount of
dollars leveraged beyond the required NFS match. In addition to the two
standard required impact indicators, an applicant must also submit
three additional indicators either selected from a suggested list in
each program announcement or applicant project-specific impact
indicators. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of
the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b,
2991b-2 and 2991b-3.)
Discussion on Comment: A comment was received that expressed
concern about how ANA's peer reviewers would interpret ANA's standard
impact indicator (2) ``amount of dollars leveraged beyond the required
non-federal share match''. The commenter is concerned that peer
reviewers will negatively perceive any leveraged resources identified
by the applicant in the request for federal funds as an indication that
the ANA project funds are not needed by the applicant. The commenter
requested that ANA add a disclaimer to the program announcements
indicating that information pertaining to leveraged resources will not
be a negative factor in the review process.
Response: ANA annually trains peer reviewers and provides specific
guidance on how to analyze proposed projects and the application
scoring process as it relates to the evaluation criteria. ANA selected
the ``leveraged resource'' indicator as a standard for all three ANA
program areas because it will
[[Page 6688]]
yield useful information to support an analysis of how ANA's limited
funding impacts native communities. The applicant's response to this
indicator will also demonstrate how the leveraged resources contribute
to the impact an ANA funded project has in a community. The ANA
definition for ``leveraged resources'' is the total dollar value of all
non-ANA resources that are committed to a proposed ANA project and are
supported by documentation that exceed the 20% non-Federal match
required for an ANA grant. Such resources may include any natural,
financial and physical resources available within the tribe,
organization, or community to assist in the successful completion of
the project. An example would be a letter from an organization that
agrees to provide a supportive action, product, and service, human or
financial contribution that will add to the potential success of the
project. ANA has considered the comment to add a disclaimer to the
program announcements and has determined that ANA guidance and peer
review procedures are sufficient to ensure a fair and reasonable review
is conducted on all applications requesting federal funds. The required
ANA impact indicator will remain as a standard data element to be used
for ANA program data collection purposes.
The optional impact indicators for SEDS are: (1) Number of
infrastructures and administrative systems, including policies and
procedures developed and implemented; (2) number of codes or ordinances
developed and implemented; (3) number of people to successfully
complete a workshop/training; (4) number of children, youth, families
or elders assisted or participating; (5) number of volunteer hours; (6)
number of faith-based or community-based partnerships; (7) number of
jobs created; (8) number of community-based small businesses
established or expanded; (9) identification of Tribal or Village
government business, industry, energy or financial codes or ordinances
that were adopted or enacted; and (10) number of micro-businesses
started. The optional impact indicators for Language, Category I are:
(1) Number of surveys completed; (2) percent and number of community
members assessed; (3) the rate of language loss or gain; (4) number of
elders consulted; (5) number of language experts consulted; (6) number
of community goals developed to preserve the native language; and (7)
number of infrastructure and administrative systems, including policies
and procedures developed and implemented. (Legal authority: Section
803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the Native American Programs Act of
1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b-2 and 2991b-3.)
The optional impact indicators for Language, Category II are: (1)
Number of people involved in establishment or operation of project; (2)
number of training classes or workshops held to teach language; (3)
number and type of materials developed; (4) number of media products
developed; (5) number of translations achieved; (6) number of
individuals who increased in ability to speak the language; (7) number
of participants who achieve fluency; (8) number of settings the
language is spoken in; and (9) number of infrastructure and
administrative systems, including policies and procedures developed and
implemented. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of
the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b,
2991b-2 and 2991b-3.)
The optional impact indicators for Environmental are: (1) Number of
environmental regulations, codes or ordinances created; (2) number of
people to successfully complete a workshop/training; (3) number of
workshops/trainings provided; (4) types of capacity building systems
created and implemented to support environmental program functions; (5)
identification of Tribal or Village government regulations, codes or
ordinances that were enacted and adopted; (6) number of regulations,
codes or ordinances successfully enforced; and (7) number of
infrastructure and administrative systems, including policies and
procedures developed and implemented. ANA may add/delete optional
impact indicators to program announcements as necessary to support ANA
initiatives. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of
the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b,
2991b-2, and 2991b-3.)
Discussion on Comment: One comment was received that pertained to
this section. The commenter suggested that ANA clarify in the
evaluation criteria section the request to submit five impact
indicators. The commenter offered text to clearly define the
applicant's option to select three indicators from the suggested
program announcement list or to submit applicant defined project
indicators or to submit a combination of ANA suggested indicators and
applicant defined indicators.
Response: ANA has reviewed the comment and concurs there is a need
to clearly describe the optional impact indicators. ANA will
incorporate the following text in the three FY 2005 ANA program
announcements. The following paragraph will precede the discussion on
impact indicators:
In addition to the two standard required impact indicators, an
applicant must also submit three additional impact indicators. These
three impact indicators may be selected from the suggested list given
below, or they may be developed for the specific proposed project, or
the applicant may submit a combination of both the ANA suggested
indicators and applicant project-specific indicators. (Legal authority:
Section 803(a) and (d), 803B and 803C of the Native American Programs
Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b, 2991b-2 and 2991b-3.)
(d) ANA corrected the timeframe for use of research data in an
application from 48 to 36 months under the Language, Category II
program.
IV. ANA Funding Restrictions
In ANA's effort to streamline its program announcements and to
clarify Funding Restriction Policies for applicants, ANA has relocated
general policy statements from the criterion section of the program
announcement text to the Funding Restrictions Policies section.
Formerly listed under ``ANA Administrative Policies'', the bullet point
on funding requests for feasibility studies, business plans, marketing
plans or written materials and the bullet point on proposals from
consortia of Tribes were moved to the section entitled ``ANA Funding
Restrictions''. These restrictions are already reflected in the ANA
eligibility restrictions at 45 CFR 1336.33(b)(2) and (b)(6). The bullet
point on the social service delivery programs was inadvertently omitted
from previous announcements, but ANA is statutorily required to address
these programs. The restriction already appears in the ANA eligibility
regulation at 45 CFR 1336.33(b)(3). ANA will include the following
funding restrictions in all program announcements in compliance with
sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Native American Programs Act of
1974 as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-3 and 45 CFR 1336:
Projects that request funds for feasibility studies,
business plans, marketing plans or written materials, such as manuals,
that are not an essential part of the applicant's project or SEDS long-
rage development plan. (Legal authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs Act of 1974 as amended, 42
[[Page 6689]]
U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-3 and 45 CFR 1336.33.)
The support of ongoing social service delivery programs or
the expansion, or continuation, of existing social service delivery
programs. (Legal authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the
Native American Programs Act of 1974 as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and
2991b-3 and 45 CFR 1336.33.)
Proposals from consortia of Tribes that are not specific
to support from and roles of member Tribes. An application from a
consortium must have goals and objectives that will create positive
impacts and outcomes in the communities of its members. ANA will not
fund activities by a consortium of Tribes that duplicates activities
for which member Tribes also receive funding from ANA. (Legal
authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Native American
Programs Act of 1974 as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-3 and 45 CFR
1336.33.)
V. Initial Screening
Prior to competitive panel review, all applications are pre-
screened for completeness. Previously, each application submitted to
ANA in response to a program announcement was pre-screened to ensure
that (a) the application was received by the program announcement
closing date; (b) the application was submitted in accordance with
Section IV, ``Application and Submission Information''; (c) the
applicant is eligible for funding in accordance with Section III,
``Eligibility Information''; (d) the applicant submitted the proper
supporting documentation such as proof of non-profit status,
resolutions, and required government forms; (e) an authorized
representative has signed the application; and (f) the applicant has a
DUNS number. An application that does not meet (a) through (f)
immediately above is determined to be incomplete and is excluded from
the competitive review process.
In an effort to ensure consistency with the way ACF evaluates
competitive discretionary grant applications, ACF has changed its
policy to include only two enforceable screen-out criteria: Timeliness
and compliance with stated funding limitations. Additionally, ACF has
approved ANA's request to include two additional screen-out criteria:
Inclusion of a signed and dated resolution by the governing body and,
for applicants that are not Tribes or Alaska Native Village
governments, submission of a resolution and proof that a majority of
the governing board of directors is representative of the community to
be served.
Consequently, ANA will screen applications for completeness prior
to the competitive panel review using the following elements: (a) The
application is received by ANA on or before the published program
announcement closing date; (b) the federal request does not exceed the
ceiling award amount as published in the program announcement; (c) the
application includes a signed and dated resolution of the governing
body; and (d) if the applicant is not a Tribe or Alaska Native Village
government, the native non-profit organization submits a resolution and
proof that a majority of the governing board of directors is
representative of the community to be served. An application that does
not contain these elements will be considered incomplete and excluded
from the competitive review process.
VI. Administrative Policies
In ANA's effort to streamline its program announcements and to
clarify administrative policies for applicants, ANA has relocated
general policy statements from the Criterion section of the program
announcement text to the Administrative Policies section. ANA has also
clarified administrative policies that have historically prompted
numerous questions and created application and project development
inconsistencies. For example, ANA removed ``Organizational Capacity''
and reworded the first bullet below for clarity. The second bullet
below clarifies the administrative policy on the funding of projects
versus programs to include the term ``short-term'' to communicate that
projects will not be awarded for longer than three years in most
program areas. The third and fourth bullets were moved from Definitions
to Administrative Policies to establish the policy to determine project
progress before additional funding is committed. For the purposes of
clarify, the fifth bullet combined and reworded the requirement for
community involvement under the definition for ``Community
Involvement'' with a similar paragraph under ``Need for Assistance''.
The sixth bullet supports the needs of ANA and was reworded for
clarity. The seventh bullet was also reworded for clarity. The policy
on the treatment of multiple applications and applications from Tribal
components has been reworded for clarity and broken into two separate
points to ensure application to both Tribes and non-profit
organizations. The revised policy is contained in the eighth and ninth
bullet points on the list below. The ninth bullet corrects the
inadvertent omission of the categories that apply to the board of
directors for non-profit applicants. ANA will now include the following
administrative policies in each program announcement (legal authority:
Sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the native American Programs Act of
1974, as amended, and 45 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-3):
Applicants must comply with the following administrative policies:
All funded applications will be reviewed to ensure that
the applicant has provided a positive statement to give credit to ANA
on all material developed using ANA funds.
ANA funds short-term projects, not programs. Proposed
projects must have definitive goals and objectives that will be
achieved by the end of the project period. All projects funded by ANA
must be completed, or self-sustaining or supported by other-than-ANA
funding at the end of the project period.
Before funding the second or third year of a multi-year
grant, ANA will require verification and support documentation from the
grantee that objectives and outcomes proposed in the preceding year
were accomplished and that the non-federal share was met.
ANA reviews the quarterly and annual reports of grantees
to determine if the grantee is meeting its goals, objectives and
activities identified in the Objective Work Plan (OWP).
Applications from national and regional organizations must
clearly demonstrate a need for the project, explain how the project
originated, discuss the community-based delivery strategy of the
project, identify and describe the intended beneficiaries, describe and
relate the actual project benefits to the community and organization
and describe a community-based delivery system. National and regional
organizations must describe their membership, define how the
organization operates and demonstrate Native community and/or Tribal
government support for the project. The type of community to be served
will determine the type of documentation necessary to support the
project.
Applicants proposing an Economic Development project must
address the project's viability. A business plan, if applicable, must
be included to describe the projects feasibility, cash flow and
approach for the implementation and marketing of the business.
ANA will review proposed projects to ensure applicants
have considered all resources available to the community to support the
project.
ANA will not accept applications from Tribal components
that are
[[Page 6690]]
Tribally authorized divisions unless the ANA application includes a
Tribal resolution.
ANA will only accept one application per eligible entity.
The first application received by ANA will be the application
considered for competition unless ANA is notified in writing which
application should be considered for competitive review.
If the applicant, other than a Tribe or an Alaska Native
Village government, is proposing a project benefiting Native Americans,
Alaska Natives, or both, the applicant must provide assurance that its
duly elected or appointed board of directors is representative of the
community to be served. Applicants must provide information that at
least a majority of the individuals serving on a non-profit applicant's
board fall into one or more of the following categories: (1) A current
or past member of the community to be served; (2) a prospective
participant or beneficiary of the project to be funded; or (3) have a
cultural relationship with the community to be served. (Legal
authority: 45 CFR 1336.33 (a).)
VII. Funding Thresholds
This is a clarification to the ANA Environmental Regulatory
Enhancement program announcement funding threshold. The funding
threshold for the Environmental Regulatory Enhancement program will be
$50,000.00 (floor amount) to $250,000.00 (ceiling amount) per budget
period. Applications exceeding the $250,000.00 threshold will be
considered non-responsive and will not be considered for funding under
this announcement. (Legal authority: Sections 803(a) and (d) and 803C
of the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended 42 U.S.C. 2991b
and 2991b-3.)
VIII. Definitions
The following definitions will be used in the appropriate program-
specific FY 2005 program announcements. ANA has clarified many areas
that applicants have historically found difficult to understand and
that have previously prompted numerous questions and created
application and project development inconsistencies. The ANA program
announcements will now include additional definitions for the following
terms:
Consortium/Tribal Village: A group of Tribes or Villages that join
together for long-term purposes or for the purpose of an ANA grant.
Impact Indicators: Measurement descriptions used to identify the
outcomes or results of the project. Outcomes or results must be
quantifiable, measurable, verifiable and related to the outcome of the
project to determine that the project has achieved its desired
objective and can be independently verified through ANA monitoring and
evaluation.
Objective Work Plan (OWP): The project plan the applicant will use
in meeting the results and benefits expected for the project. The
results and benefits are directly related to the Impact Indicators. The
OWP provides detailed descriptions of how, when, where, by whom and why
activities are proposed for the project and is complemented and
condensed in the OWP. ANA will require separate OWPs for each year of
the project. (Form OMB 0980-0204 exp 10/31/2006.)
Minor Renovation or Alteration: Work required to change the
interior arrangements or other physical characteristics of an existing
facility, or install equipment so that it may be more effectively used
for the project. Minor alteration and renovation may include work
referred to as improvements, conversion, rehabilitation, remodeling or
modernization, but is distinguished from construction and major
renovations. A minor alteration and/or renovation must be incidental
and essential for the project (``incidental'' meaning the total
alteration and renovation budget must not exceed the lesser of $150,000
or 25 percent of total direct costs approved for the entire project
period).
Total Approved Project Costs: The sum of the Federal request plus
the non-Federal share. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b-3).
IX. Application Review Information
To ensure that grantees fulfill their obligations to ANA, ANA is
including a review of grantees' past performance when considering the
applicant for a new or ongoing award under all three program areas. The
inclusion of this item in the application consideration process will
assist ANA in making its funding decisions on whether or not to award
to a particular grant applicant. Factors that may impact a grantee's
past performance are their timeliness to report submission
requirements, timely use and proper expenditure of the grant award
funds and the administrative ease of closing out the grantee at the end
of the award period.
The following statement is included under the Application
Consideration for the Review and Selection Process:
Application Consideration: The Commissioner's funding decision is
based on an analysis of the application by the review panel, panel
review scores and recommendations; an analysis by ANA staff; review of
previous ANA grantee's past performance; comments from the State and
Federal agencies having contract and grant performance-related
information; and other interested parties.
X. Native Language Program Area
The title for Native Language Category I grants has been changed
from ``Native Language Category I Planning'' to ``Native Language
Category I Assessment''. The change clarifies the purpose of the 12-
month Category I grant. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and
803C of the Native American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
2991b and 2991b-3.)
The FY 2005 Native Language Program Announcement expands the
Category I-Program Area of Interest and the necessary assessment data
to be collected. ANA recommends each applicant consider the Program
Area of Interest in the development of a project. The Program Area of
Interest under Category I is ``A project for data collection and
compilation that surveys the current language status through a
``formal'' method (e.g., work performed by a linguist and/or a language
survey conducted by community members) or an ``informal'' method (e.g.,
a community consensus of the language status based on elders, Tribal
scholars and/or other community members) with the development of long-
range language preservation goals and uses elders in the development of
these goals. This assessment data should capture, at a minimum, the
following data: Number of speakers; age of speakers; gender of
speakers; level(s) of fluency; number of first language speakers
(native language as the first language acquired); number of second
language speakers (native language as the second language acquired);
where native language is used (e.g., home, court system, religious
ceremonies, church, media, school governance or cultural activities);
source of data (formal and/or informal); and rate of language loss or
gain. (Legal authority: Section 803(a) and (d) and 803C of the Native
American Programs Act of 1974, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2991b and 2991b-
3.)
Additional Information
Technical Correction: Upon general review of the Notice, Section V:
Screening Elements, item ``d'' will be re-written as ``Each application
submitted under an ANA program announcement will undergo a pre-review
screening for:
[[Page 6691]]
* * * (d) if the applicant is not a Tribe or Alaska Native Village
government, the applicant must submit proof that a majority of the
governing board of directors is representative of the community to be
served.'' The reference to Native non-profit organizations was
inadvertently placed in the text. This correction will be reflected in
all three FY 05 ANA program announcements.
Technical Correction: Upon general review of the Notice, Section
II. Evaluation Criteria (a) additional text is needed to clarify the
use of the ANA Project Abstract form in relation to Criteria One:
Introduction and Project Summary/Application Format. Instructional text
will be inserted in the ANA evaluation Criterion One to state ``In
addition to using the ANA Project Abstract form, applicants will submit
a brief narrative summary of the project that provides more information
on the applicant and proposed project.'' The additional text will
provide clarity to the applicant as they respond to the program
announcement.
Dated: January 31, 2005.
Quanah Crossland Stamps,
Commissioner, Administration for Native Americans.
[FR Doc. 05-2325 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-M